A-va
I
Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2016 with funding from Princeton Theological Seminary Library
https://archive.org/details/biblicalrepertor4121walk
TIIE
PRINCETON REVIEW.
APRIL, 1 8 6 9.
No. II.
Akt. I. — The Welsh Methodists : being the Past History and Present Aspect of the Galvinistic Methodists in Wales. By Rev. John Hughes, Liverpool. In three volumes.
Rev. John Hughes, Liverpool, has contributed several val- uable works to the religious literature of Wales, but his repu- tation as an author will depend mainly upon las “ History of the Welsh Methodists.” A man distinguished among his brethren for sound judgment, painstaking conscientiousness, and labo- rious research, he was eminently qualified to record the begin- ning and growth of that denomination which has done so much to christianize the Welsh people, and of which he was an hon- ored preacher for the long period of forty-seven years. His eminent standing among his own religious denomination, was not so much the result of eloquence in the pulpit or learning as a scholar, for it would be unjust to say that he was pre-emi- nent in either ; but he had sufficient of both, combined with good judgment and common sense, to enable him to maintain a position second to none in the estimation of his countrymen.
In speaking of the subject of his work, our author seldom uses the term “ Calvinistic,” an omission it would not do for us VOL. XLI. — NO. II. 91
164 The Oalvinistic Methodists in Wales. [April,
to follow in this article. In Wales, the term “Methodists” is universally understood to mean that denomination which nearly assimilates to the Old School Presbyterians in this country ; but the term here would be taken to designate the Episcopal Methodists, a body quite different from the Oalvinistic Method- ists of AY ales.
The work before us is divided into five parts : 1st, Introduc- tory History ; 2d, Rise of Oalvinistic Methodism ; 3d, Its Suc- cess ; 4tli, Its Local History in the various shires ; 5th, Its Con- stitution and Influence. In the first chapter we have a cursory examination of the mooted question as to the first introduction of the Gospel into Britain ; but our author confesses his inabili- ty to throw much light upon the subject. AVithout altogether rejecting the hypothesis that the island was visited by Paul, he inclines to the opinion that the Gospel was first introduced there by Brennus, the father of Caractacus, who was convert- ed while a prisoner in Rome. This opinion is founded upon the testimony of the British Triads, as good authority as can be found to sustain any other view of the subject. He dwells at considerable length upon the efforts of Rome to in- troduce popery among the inhabitants; and how, through brute force and the most atrocious perfidy, this was finally accomplished in the eighth century ; though when the AArelsh bishops finally succumbed, it caused great commotion and some disturbance. In speaking of these dark times, the author remarks : —
“ It would be profitless for us to dwell longer on this portion of the history of our ancestors. They were, by this time, full of popish superstition, and suffer- ing terribly from wars, from the incursions of the Saxons and other natious, and from internal feuds among their own princes. ”
When AArickliffe, the “morning star ” of the Protestant Reformation, appeared, his influence was felt in AYales, though in but a slight degree. There were a few AATelshmen in Oxford in AVickliffe's time, and through these his views were disseminated to some extent in the Principality. One Walter Brute, becoming acquainted with the writings of the reformer, was through them brought to a saving knowledge of the Saviour, and devoted himself with zeal and success to the work of instructing others in the true way of salvation. For this he
165
1S69.] The Calvinistic Methodists in Wales.
was summoned before an ecclesiastical court, and adjudged oruilty of heresy. What became of him after this is not known. Wiekliffe himself was for four years a fugitive in Wales, and was finally arrested there through the instrumentality of Lord Powis.
In the sixteenth century appeared William Salsbury, a native of Denbighshire, educated at Oxford and London, who, after his return to Wales, translated the Hew Testament into Welsh, being the first translation of the Scriptures into that language. He was assisted in this good work by Rev. Dr. Davies, bishop of St. Davids. Sir William Herbert and Earl Pembroek (better known among his countrymen as Sir John Prys), were zealous colaborers with Salsbury in his efforts to disseminate Gospel truths among the people.
Subsequently Rev. Dr. Morgan prepared a translation of the whole Bible, which appeared in the year 1588. While engaged in this work, Dr. Morgan was cited to appear before Archbishop Whitgifr, to answer charges preferred against him for being engaged in such work ; but this action, designed by his enemies to frustrate his labors, had quite a different result ; for when the archbishop saw his learning and ability, and un- derstood his object, he urged him to persevere, and assisted him in bringing out an edition of the whole Bible in the Welsh language. Thus, by degrees, the ground was being prepared for the harvest of the Reformation. Edmund Pryse brought out a metrical version of the Psalms, which is much esteemed to this day. Dr. Parry Morgan’s successor in ^the bishopric of Ely, revised and corrected his predecessor’s trans- lation of the Bible ; and in the early part of the seventeenth century appeared Rees Pritchard, who was a very popular preacher, and "well known in- Wales as “Vicar of Llan- ymddyfvi, ” and author of a volume called “ Camryll y Cymry, ” a work, indeed, not possessing much poetical merit, but replete with advice and admonition to his countrymen, and written in an easy, familiar style, well suited to the then state of society.
We are not to suppose that the Welsh people had never possessed the Scriptures in their own language, before the appearance of Salsbury’s translation. We have indubitable
166
The Calvinistic Methodists in Wales. [April,
proofs that portions at least had been translated centuries be- fore, but the art of printing had not then been discovered, and popish interdicts had banished all traces of these earlv translations from the land.
All the good men we have mentioned remained within the pale of the Established Church; but one Mr. "Wroth, who refused to read the “ Book of Sports,” being turned out of his living, immediately collected together a congregation of his own, in the year 1639, and this was the first dissenting church in Wales of which we have any knowledge. Eminent as colaborers with Mr. Wroth at this time, were Revs. William Erbury and Walter Cradoc; the latter of whom officiated some years at kiAll Hallows the Great,” in London, and preached before parliament in the time of Oliver Cromwell.
In treating of the time intervening between the events just mentioned, and the rise of Methodism, we think the author describes the condition of the country in darker colors than the truth of history will warrant. He makes no mention of the Quakers, though they were a flourishing and influential religious body in the Principality, and many of them emigra- ted to Pennsylvania with William Penn. Many of them were men of wealth and social standing; and we cannot doubt that their strict morality and fervent piety were the means of pre- paring the minds of the people to receive the words of truth from the more fervent and zealous men who came after them.
The fathers of Calvinistic Methodism were Howell Harris and Daniel Rowlands. They do not appear to have known any thing of each other in the beginning. The spirit moved both about the same time ; one in Brecknockshire and the other in Cardiganshire. Speaking of this circumstance, our author says : —
“Tliis period was noted in other respects. This was the time when the Metho- dist reformation commenced in England, through John Wesley and George Whitefield. Whitefield was born the same year with Howell Harris, 1714;
Daniel Rowlands a year before: and Wesley ten years before Rowlands
Harris was converted in 1735 and commenced itinerating in 1737. This was a little before Whitefield and Wesley. As to Rowlands, we are certain that he was a successful preacher in 1738.”
Daniel Rowlands was converted through the preaching of Rev. Griffith Jones, a clergyman of the Church of England,
167
1S69.] The Calvinistic Methodists in Wales.
whose name is venerated among his countrymen to this day for the good he accomplished in various ways, but more especially through the establishment of free schools. His heart was set upon this work, and we have reliable data for stating that over 150,000 were taught to read Welsh in these schools in the course of twenty-four years. Rowlands himself was a clergyman of the Established Church, had learning, ability, and eloquence ; but he was of an immoral life. He was very ambitious for popularity, and felt an especial desire to rival one Mr. Pugh, a Congregational pastor in the neigh- borhood. Understanding that this gentleman dwelt largely upon the heinousness of sin and the terrible retribution sure to overtake the unrepentant sinner, he decided to copy this minis- ter in the selection of his subject, though preaching of that which he had never felt himself. He partly succeeded ; his popularity increased ; but what was designed by him for his own glory was blessed by God to the salvation of souls. Soon after this, hearing that Rev. Griffith Jones was to preach in the neigh- borhood, he determined to go and hear him. This was the turning point in his career. His conscience was awakened, and he felt his utter helplessness as a sinner. His depression was so great, that he concluded not to preach any more ; but he was encouraged to go forward by an unexpected remark of one of his parishioners, while walking home with many others from hearing Jones, the sermon they had just heard being the all-engrossing topic of conversation, and many declaring they had never heard such a sermon before. All this had a most depressing effect on Rowlands. But a man who rode by his side, said, “Well, well, you may praise to-day’s meeting as much as you like, I received no benefit there ; I have reason to thank God for the little ‘ ffeiriad ’ of Llangeitho,” at the same time putting his hand on Rowlands’ shoulder. This simple remark encouraged him to keep on with his preaching, in which, after this, there was a notable change. The truth was brought home to the people with the earnestness of per- sonal conviction. Immense crowds came to hear him every Sabbath, and most blessed results followed. So thorough was the change in Rowlands himself, that many regarded him as demented, and he was commonly known as the crazy curate
168
The Calvinistic Methodists in Wales. [April,
(“ off e triad crac ”). The circumstance that first led him from his own neigliborliood to preach, is worth relating. A ladv living in Yotrad-ffin was visiting her sister at Llangeitho, and, of course, went to hear Rowlands. Though she returned home the following week, she came all the way (a distance of twenty miles) to Llangeitho to hear him again the next Sabbath. This she did for six months. At the end of that time she went to him, and said, “If what you say is true, sir, there are many in my neighborhood in a very dangerous con- dition, and going rapidly to eternal misery ; for the sake of precious souls come over and preach to them.” This he readily promised if she would obtain the consent of the curate. The permission was given, and Rowlands went and preached, and no less than thirty were converted under this sermon.
From tke influence he exercised upon, and the direction he gave to the reformatory movement, Rowlands may properly be considered the father of Calvinistic Methodism ; still, in point of time, Howell Harris has precedence. Mr. Harris was the son of a wealthy gentleman in Brecknockshire. In his youth he was very wild and irreligious. He intended to enter the sacred ministry, simply with a view to worldly advancement, but in approaching the communion table for the first time, he was awakened to a sense of his own unworthiness, and soon found peace in Christ, In his twenty-first year he went to Oxford, intending to prepare himself for the sacred office; but becoming disgusted with the immorality of the place, he returned to Wales. Soon after this, he commenced going from house to house exhorting, and his labors were blessed to the salvation of many souls. lie was an eloquent speaker, and the people came in crowds to hear him. But he was not allowed to go on in peace. The clergy accused him of irregularity, and fostered vulgar prejudice against him on this account. The gentry hated him for exposing their im- moralities, and he was prosecuted by the authorities, and suffered many indignities from the common people. Harris was walking an untrodden path, and his course was so contrary to all precedent that it shocked those who believed in “ apos- tolic succession.” Here was he, without ordination by any bishop, or authority from any ecclesiastical body, doing the
iS69.] The Calvinistic Methodists in Wales. 1 GO
work of an evangelist. lie was himself, at times, sorely puz- zled as to the propriety of his course, and at oue time had de- cided to abandon his work. But at this time he received a letter from Whitefield, urging him to go on with the good work, and this encouraged him to persevere. He soon became acquainted with Rowlands, but there was no concert of ac- tion between them.
Contemporary with these two, were Rev. William Williams, Pant-y-eelyn, whose hymns are to the Welsh Church what those of Isaac Watts are to the English, and who was the first of the Methodist fathers to leave the Established Church ; and Revs. Howell Davies and Peter Williams, the latter of whom was the author of a brief exposition of the Bible.
Thus far, we have followed the course of the Calvjnistic reformation in South Wales; but the North was still in a most deplorable state of ignorance, superstition, and immoral- ity. We have accounts of only six dissenting congregations in all North Wales, though there were a few faithful workers in the Lord’s vineyard. There was one small Independent Church in Llanbrynnmair, Montgomeryshire, where Rev. Lewis Rees was settled. Though himself not a Calvinistic Method- ist, he was a man of liberal views, and recognizing the hand of the Lord with the good men in the South, he was largely instrumental in introducing them to the North. Happening to meet with Howell Harris, he represented to him the low state of religion in the North, and strongly advised him to visit them. Harris paid his first visit to the North in 1739, though this time he went no farther than Bala ; on a subse- quent visit, made in 1741, he journeyed as far as Caernarvon- shire. While Harris was preaching by what was afterward known as Wynnstay Arms, Llanbrynnmair, four men (three of whom were brothers), went on the top of a small house close by to hear him, and the four were converted under this ser- mon. From these conversions we date the beginning of Cal- vinistic Methodism in North Wales. These men, with a few others of like mind, formed themselves into a church, which was sustained by themselves and their children after them.
In the beginning of the eighteenth century, there was not a single dissenting congregation in Anglesey. It was com-
170 The Calvinistic Methodists in Wales. [April,
pletely in possession of the Church, and we are told that the people there were more regular in their attendance upon its services than in any other part of the country.
There lived near Llangefui a man by the name of Thomas Pritchard, whose three sons were exercised on the subject of religion about the year 1730. Their minds were dis- turbed through reading the Bible and other good books ; and they soon commenced to talk to others of the things which they themselves felt, and thus the seed was sown which was afterward to bear such abundant fruit.
These early pioneers were not allowed to pursue their good work in peace. Their meetings were often dispersed, and they themselves persecuted, iined, and imprisoned. The leaders in these things were generally clergymen of the Established Church, who are known, in some instances, to have furnished the lawless portions of the communities with strong drink, in order to work them up to the point of committing violence. A very common practice was for landlords to turn from their farms those who favored the dissenters ; and though this caused much suffering among believers, it was the means of doing much good, for the good people were scattered, but they earned and proclaimed their faith wherever they went.
After this brief sketch of reformatory movements in differ- ent parts of the country, it will now be necessary to go back somewhat in point of time, to trace the steps taken by the leaders toward unity of action and the formation of a new sect. The following extract from ]ffr. Hughes will give the reader a very clear idea of the objects in view in looking to- ward incorporation : —
“ The main object of the reformers, undoubtedly, was to awaken their fellow- men to a sense of their spiritual condition, without looking to the formation of a party or sect. They intended, and that sincerely, to carry on the reformation with- in the pale of the English Church; and it was without expectation on their part, in a sense in spite of them, that the reformation took another form. The first movers in the work, with the exception of Daniel Rowlands, were noted for their labor and itinerant ministry. They were not restricted to any church, neighbor- hood, shire, or country; but moved with untiring celerity from one place.to anoth- er— from shire to shire, from South to North, and from Wales to England ; their object was to awaken the whole country, by stirring appeals to the whole nation in general. Rowlands, it is true, was more settled than his colaborers, still he seconded the efforts of Howell Harris, William Williams, and Howell Davies
171
1869.] The Calvinistic Methodists in Wales.
to the extent hiscircurastances would permit. The labor of the Welsh reformer?, in its itinerant and voluntary aspects, coincided with those of the immortal White- field in England. After laboring for some time in this way, and being the means of awakening many hundreds of souls to think of their latter end, they saw the necessity of some more uniform and permanent plan to care for those who had been converted. The religious knowledge of these early believers was, of ne- cessity, small, and some means must be devised to instruct them in the nurture and admonition of the Lord ; the fears and convictions of some were almost un- endurable. and some means must be provided to guide and comfort them ; while the zeal and devotion of others were so intense, and their desire to do something for the Saviour so strong, as to make it absolutely necessary that some order and government should be established over them.
11 Also there were early signs that some among the clergy, and among the dissent- ing ministers, wished to coalesce with them, share in their labors, and give them a helping hand. Besides this, several laymen were found, of more knowledge and parts than others, who felt a desire to warn their fellow-men of their dan- gers, in the way that Harris himself had done. It was very natural that Harris, especially, should look with favor upon the aspirations of these men ; and since the cry of the converts was so loud for succor and guidance, it was almost im- possible to resist them. Here were many people, in different parts of the country, who had turned to the Saviour, but with none to care for them ; there were some among them, with a degree of fitness for the work, but there was no set- tled way of authorizing and supervising them; and there were a number of clergymen, who had already received orders, either from episcopal or dissenting hands, offering to assist them — and what was to be done ? It was perfectly clear that something should be done to meet these new circumstances. But what? who should move in the matter? and how ? There was danger in delay, lest injury be done to the souls calling for help, and lest improper persons should undertake the work, and cause disorders and quarrels. ”
In this strait, Harris, Howlands, Davies, and Williams, used to meet together for consultation. Thus far the care of the new converts fell principally upon Harris ; for Howlands had parish churches under his care, Williams was yet a cu- rate subject to episcopal authority, and Davies was in delicate health. In 1742 they sent for Mr. Whitefield to assist them, and after prayerful consideration it was decided that the lay- men should be divided into stewards and exliorters ; that Har- ris should have a general supervision over them ; that the ordained ministers should visit the flocks as often as they could; that the stewards should have certain districts assigned to them, while the private exhorters should have charge of one or two congregations, still following their usual callings ; while a few, fitted for the work by their talents and piety, were to assist the stewards in a more general way.
172 The Calvinistic Methodists in Wales. [April,
The first association of the Calvinistic Methodists in "Wales, was held at Waterford, Glamorganshire, on the 6th and 7th of January, 1712. There were present four clergymen who had received episcopal orders — Revs. George Whitefield, Daniel Howlands, William Williams, and John Powell ; and ten unor- dained preachers. The four ministers, with Howell Harris, John Humphreys, and John Cennick, were considered as the original executive board, and the others received their appoint- ments from them. Whitefield was chosen moderator. Some of the resolutions of this body are worthy of notice. It was resolved, among other things —
“ That those brethren who hesitated to receive the Sacrament in the English Church, on account of the impiety of those who administered and received it, or among the dissenters on account of their lukewarmness, continue to receive it in the Church, until the Lord opens a clear door for leaving her communion.
“ That no exhorter be considered one of us until he has been proved and found acceptable ; and that no one go beyond his assigned district without pre- vious consultation.”
This was not tbe only association where George Whitefield was present, but he continued to visit the brethren in W ales at least once- a year, till he went to Georgia for the third time. Hot only did Whitefield and others visit Wales, but Harris, Rowlands, and Davies were in the habit of visiting the reform- ers in England ; and when Whitefield visited Scotland in 1711, he left II. Harris in charge of the Tabernacle for four months. It is difficult to determine how long the English and Welsh re- formers continued to co-operate, but probably not for a great length of time. The difference in language was one great ob- stacle to this, for but few of those raised in Wales were able to preach in both languages. Besides, the work in the Principal- ity was increasing so rapidly, that the Welsh reformers soon found they had work enough at home, without attending to other fields. In addition to the yearly or quarterly associa- tion, monthly associations were established, having local juris- diction, but subject to the authority of the yearly association.
The first association in the Horth was held at a place called Lyddyn, near Llanidloes, in Montgomeryshire, but they were rapidly established in other parts of the country.
The reformatory movement at this time was of a most anom- alous character. Those indentified with it professed adherence
173
I860.] The Calvinistic Methodists in Wales.
to the Established Church, but their acts were in direct con- travention of its authority. Refusing to comply with the Toleration Act of William and Mary, by registering them- selves as dissenters, and taking out licenses as such, they ren- dered themselves liable to its penalties, preferring this to being called schismatics.
But this state of things could not last long. Rev. W. Wil- liams had received deacon’s orders, but the bishop refused him full orders. Revs. Howell Davies and Peter Williams soon lost their livings, and found all other churches shut against them, and they were compelled, if they preached at all, to do so outside the pale of the Establishment. Rev. D. Rowlands continued in his living longer than the others, but he too was finally expelled. Rev. Thomas Charles was turned out of three livings in succession, until he finally concluded to find peace outside the Church. Rev. Simon Lloyd soon followed his example.
These and many similar obstacles thrown in the way of the early reformers, only served to advance the cause ; but they had soon to pass through another fiery ordeal, arising from internal dissensions. The early movements had the character of a crusade against sin, denunciation of all forms of wickedness, and a portrayal of the wrath of God against the ungodly. Little attention was paid to questions of doctrine, and consequently there was a very general ignorance on these points, especially on the Sonship, Offices, and Atonement of the Saviour. We use the wTord ignorance, however, with reference to the new converts generally, and not with respect to the early preachers, for most of them were educated ; but they may truly be called “ preachers of the law,” and not of the “ gospel,” in the sense those terms are generally under- stood. God as the hater of wickedness and punisher of sin, was the central figure on which they mostly dwelt ; Christ as Redeemer was only a secondary object of their sermons. Llarris was the first one to depart from this line of preaching. When the majesty of God made flesh was revealed to his own mind, he dwelt on this theme in his sermons with the fervor and earnestness which characterized him before in dwell- ing on the righteousness of God. Carrying this doctrine to
174 The Calvinistic Methodists in Wales. [April,
its utmost limits, his words sounded strangely on the ears of those who had been accustomed to the other kind of preach- ing. Many thought that he carried the doctrine too far, and he soon felt the sting of unmerited criticism. To one who had been accustomed to the foremost rank among the reformers, this was a sore trial, and his impetuous nature could not brook the opposition to which he was subjected. The result was a quarrel, and a division in the year 1751, extending through all the churches, many of the members clinging to Harris, and the two parties soon became known as Harris’s people, and Rowlands’ people. Harris retired to Trevecca, and established a kind of community there, where many of those who coincided with his views went to live with him. Many aspersions have been cast upon Harris for his course in this matter, but the evidence existing at this day clearly establishes that his motive was pure and disinterested, though perhaps his fiery temper carried him too far. The effect of this quarrel was most deplorable. The churches were divided, many of those who were most zealous got dis- couraged, and lapsed into the Established Church. But Harris and his adherents adopted a course most favorable to the success of the other branch. Assuming a kind of passive attitude, they left the field almost entirely to the anti-Harris people. As a consequence, the Harris party finally disap- peared from the Principality, while the lost ground was recov- ered by Rowlands and those who adhered to him.
The cause suffered some from the introduction of Antino- mian doctrines ; but the occurrence of these years most to be regretted, was the expulsion of Rev. Peter Williams from the communion for a supposed heresy in his opinion on the Sonship of Christ. Many of the old fathers had now passed away, and some of the young men, especially N. Rowlands, son of D. Rowlands, acted with great rashness and severity toward P. Williams in his old age. While much may be said in mitigation of the treatment which Williams received, it cannot be defended on any ground of Christian charity and forbearance.
At the end of seventy years from the time Harris and Rowlands first started the Methodist movement, they were yet
1S69.] The Calvinistic Methodists in T Yales. 175
without a ministry among themselves, and depended for the rite of baptism and the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper, upon those who had received orders from the hands of a bishop ; and there were among them, in all North Wales, only three ordained clergymen. True, the condition of things was some- what better in the South, but even there the supply was far short of the demand. And they must depend for their future supply upon such clergy of the Established Church as might be induced to join them, as there was no hope of getting any bishop to give orders to any that might he deemed worthy among themselves. So when the rite of baptism had to be performed, the weight of influence was in favor of taking the children to the Church rather than to the dissenters.
Not only was there great spiritual destitution on account of the scarcity of ordained ministers, but a most remarkable fact was, that there were only a few places where even these would administer the sacrament ; and when the churches clamored for more privileges in this respect, their request was treated with marked disrespect, and opposed with much ill-feeling, by the clergy, wlm formed a sort of ecclesiastical aristocracy in the new denomination. It was denounced as an innovation upon an order of things that had been signally blessed ot God for the salvation of souls.
On the other hand, it was claimed that these beneficent results had not followed on account of these traces of attach- ment to the Church, hut in spite of them ; and if the sacra- ments could be administered in some unconsecrated places, there was no good reason why they should not be in all. This agitation was continued for some years, until the clergy were finally forced to succumb, though the privilege was granted but sparingly for many years.
But the agitation caused by the demand for a greater num- ber of places where the sacraments could be administered, was not to be compared with that which followed the demand for an increase in the number of those who should administer them. Most serious consequences were threatened before this question was finally settled, and the denomination broke loose from all connection with the Established Church. And when the demands of the churches were finally acceded to in
176
Some Recent Discussions on the [April,
these respects, some of tlie clergy withdrew from the con- nection, and several churches were lost. Among those first ordained to the ministry after this action, were John Elias, John Evans, Ebenezer Morris, and Ebenezer Richard.
After this complete separation from the Church of England, the Calvinistic Methodists have had a career of almost un- interrupted prosperity, and they now number nearly 100,000 communicants in the Principality, besides having many large and flourishing churches in London, Liverpool, and other cities of England, where the Welsh people have settled.
The denomination is in a prosperous condition in the United States, where the question has been agitated of uniting with the Presbyterians, a union, however, not likely to be consummated for some time to come, owing more to the difference in language than to a difference in doctrines and church polity.
Art. II. — 1. The Question of an Independent Morality. By the Rev. Eugene Bersier, of Paris.
2. Present State of Moral Philosophy in Great Britain in relation to Theology. By the Rev. James McCosn, D. D., LL. D., author of “ Method of Divine Government,” “ Intui- tions of the Mind,” “ Examination of Mr. Mills’ Philoso- phy,” &c.
3. Mental Science : A Compendium of Psychology , and the History of Philosophy. Designed as a Text Book for High Schools and Colleges. By Alexander Bain, M. A., author of “The Senses and the Intellect,” “The Emotions and the Will,” &c. New York : D. Appleton & Co., 186S.
4. The Atonement a Satisfaction for the Ethical Mature of hath God and Man. By Prof. William G. T. Siiedd, Bibliotheca Sacra, October, 1859.
5. The Law of Love, and Love as a Law : or Moral Science , Theoretical and Practical. By Mark Hopkins, D. D., LL. D., President of Williams College. New York: Charles Scribner & Co., 1869.
1869.] Fundamental Principle of Morals. 177
6. Moral Philosophy : Including Theoretical and Practical Ethics. By Joseph Haven, D. D., Professor in Chicago Theological Seminary. Boston : Gould & Lincoln.
We have placed this list of comparatively recent publica- tions on Moral Science, in its fundamental idea, or some of its theological bearings — a list which might be greatly extend- ed— not only because we may refer to them in what follows, but because it will show our readers at a glance how univer- sally and inevitably, theories as to the nature of virtue and first principles of ethics, interpenetrate and modify systems of theology. Not only are some of these productions ethico- theological in their very titles, but the others are largely from professors of theology, or from those whose positions and occupations give their views a religious as well as ethical sig- nificance. The two important articles by Drs. McCosh and Bersier, were read at the late Amsterdam Conference of the Evangelical Alliance, and are published in the very valuable volume which gives an official account of their proceedings.* This shows quite undeniably, that questions as to the essential nature and ultimate idea of morality, are not mere playthings for speculative subtlety, or cloistered amusement. They are grappled with, not merely by controvertists, polemics, and hair- splitters, or by this or that narrow sect or school of the- ology. Nor are they ignored or despised by the great body of Christians and divines who care chiefly for the essentials of Christianity. The very basis of the Evangelical Alliance, as all know, is the essentials of Christian faith, in which the evangelical churches of all the nations agree ; yet papers on “Independent Morality,” and “Moral Philosophy in relation to Theology,” were welcomed as quite within the scope of this great ecumenical convocation. For they are felt, not
* Proceedings of the Amsterdam Conference of the Evangelical Alliance, held in August, 1867. Published by authority of the Council of the British Organization. Edited by the Rev. Edward Sterne, D. D., one of the Honorary Secretaries. London : Office of the Evangelical Alliance, 1868.
We know not where else to look for so full and trustworthy, yet compendious account of the present state of Christendom, as to churches, theology, social re- lations and institutions, philanthropy and missions. The article by Dr. McCosh has also been published in a volume with some of his more recent papers, inclu- ding his final rejoinder to Mill. This we have not seen.
ITS
Some Recent Discussions on the [April,
merely by disputants, schools, and sects, but by the catholic Christian thinkers who articulate the mind of that church, which is the one bodj’ ” of Christ, to strike at the very heart of Christian doctrine, faith, and life.
And that this must be so, can not better be evinced than in the judicious and forcible introductory observations of Dr. McCosh, in the document above referred to. He says —
“ Of all departments of natural knowledge, the sciences of the human mind come nearest to religion ; and of all the mental sciences, moral philosophy stands in the closest relation to Christian theology. The reason is obvious. It is the province of moral philosophy to unfold the laws of man's moral nature, ofliis mo- tive powers generally; such as the emotions, the will, and especially the moral faculty, or the conscience. • Now, the Christian religion is especially addressed to man's moral and spiritual nature. It comes to us as a revelation from God, unfolding and manifesting more fully to us his moral perfections, and making known a means of reconciling man to his maker, and renewing his soul in the likeness of God. Christian theology, by which I mean a reflex systematic expo- sition of the truths of God’s Word, has ever conducted theologians, whether they wished it or no, into moral discussions : and ethical philosophy has consciously or unconsciously exercised an important influence upon the construction of systems of divinity. The Christian religion has contributed new elements, in particular all the evangelical graces, to ethics ; and a high moral philosophy, especially a high estimate of the law, has ever tended to foster high views of the justice of God, and deep views of the nature of sin, and of the necessity of an atonement. The two have thus acted and reacted on each other." — Page 337 of the Amster- dam Conference of the Evangelical Alliance. Our quotations from Dr. McCosh and Bersier, will be from this volume.
Again : —
“ It might be shown by an extensive induction from the history of the past, that the theology of every age has commonly had a philosophy suited to it. An elevated philosophy has tended to produce a lofty theology, while a high theology has been stimulating a high philosophy; and, on the other hand, a low philosophy is apt to generate a meagre theology, while an inadequate theology is prone to lean on a low-toned philosophy. For some years we have had a dis- position toward a negative theology in Great Britain ; and now we have a negative philosophy corresponding to it, and countenancing it. In theology there has been an inclination to oinil justice from among the attributes of God , and to deny the expiatory nature of our Lord's sacrifice for sin. And now we have a philosophy which undermines an independent and eternal morality, and throivs us back on pleasures and pains, as the elements out of which such moral convictions and ideas as we have, are formed. These two ore running their course together, and we may look far an offspring partaking of the nature of both, to proceed from their marriage union." — Pages 342-3.
We italicize these last sentences, because, written wholly without reference to questions, persons, parties, or books here,
179
1869.] Fundamental Principle of Morals.
they so fully vindicate what we shall have cause to say farther on.
Dr. McCosh also adverts, with great good judgment, to the subject of an “ independent morality,” formally discussed in the paper of Bersier. By this is meant a morality springing up wholly from the dictates of the human conscience, and in- dependent of philosophy and religion, particularly Christian revelation. Out of this the skeptical mind of the age, especi- ally of France, is striving to evolve a basis of unity among men, which, escaping the discords of speculators, religionists, and sects, shall bind together society and the nations, on the simple platform of the original and independent morality taught by the natural conscience. The futility of all such attempts is ably shown, in the main argument of Bersier, and incidentally by Dr. McCosh. They both agree, that inde- pendently of Scripture, we have a moral nature which gives primary moral ideas, intuitions, judgments — which gives the sense of right and wrong, obligation, merit, guilt; and points out that some actions are right and others wrong. This must be so, if man is a moral and accountable being. It must be so, else he would be incapable of perceiving it to be right and obligatory to believe and obey the word of God, and conform to its moral precepts. It is so, as all fact proves. No race of men has been so imbruted as to be utterly desti- tute of moral sentiments and ideas, however perverted. It is so, for it is the express averment of the Bible, that those who are without the revealed law, have the law written on their hearts. But while to this extent, there is an “ independent morality,” it is utterly insufficient for man’s need, because, 1. He is largely defiled and blinded by sin. He therefore needs a supernatural revelation at once to supplement and correct it. 2. He is wholly inadequate to discover a Redeemer, or a way of salvation from sin, or to indicate the duties flowing from redemption, until supernaturally revealed. 3. It is im- possible for conscience, as Bersier shows, to be wholly inde- pendent of religious, speculative, or other beliefs, even were its ultimate principles invariably the same in all men of all ages ; yet the application of those principles must vary with the convictions entertained in regard to the objects to which VOL. xli. — NO. II. 92
180
Some Recent Discussions on the
[April,
they apply. Must not one who believes in the being of God, believe in religious duties which the atheist disowns ? Must not one wlio believes that he will be propitiated by self-im- molation and diabolical orgies, have a different view of religious duty from that of the simple believer in the Lord Jesus Christ ? Or, passing from tbe sphere of religion, as Bersier well shows, the moral judgments will be controlled by our beliefs regarding the end of human life, and the ideal of human destiny and aspirations.
“For example, suppose that in my view, as in that of Epicurus and Lucretius , happiness is the end of existence, it is evident that my morality will thereby be influenced. The least advanced student knows, as well as Montesquieu , that one of the most powerful causes of the decline of Rome, was the growing influence of Epicurean maxims. Suppose that science leads me to see in the negro race, only a variety between the ape and the man, it is evident that, while continuing an advocate of the theory of human equality, I am by no means obliged to accord this equality to those who do not pertain to my species. Suppose that physi- ology convinces me, that what we call free-will, is an illusion; and that at bottom my will is always and everywhere fatally determined by the organiza- tion of my brain, do you mean to say that the idea which I have of my respon- sibility will not receive a shock ? Suppose that evil appears to me to be a necessity tied, it may be, to my material organization, or to my finite nature, or to the badly constituted relations of human society; is it not quite evident that I shall soon see before me three clearly defined theories, which draw after them three moralities?” — Pages 328-9.
He then gives a striking instance of the argument of an adherent of the Darwinian theory, against the Christian pity and charity which cherisli and protect the “ weak, the incura- ble, the wicked themselves, all who are the disgrace of nature. The evils with which .they are afflicted tend to perpetuate themselves, and to multiply indefinitely ; the bad increases instead of diminishing, and tends to augment itself at expense of the good. Mow many of these creatures are then incapa- ble of getting their own livelihood,” &c., &c. That is, the Darwinian theory, as some hoid it, logically demands the ex- tinction, and not the merciful protection, of the feeble and helpless portion of our race. It is needless then to argue that the natural conscience, though sufficient to discover to us the first elements of morality, is insufficient, without light from above, duly to inform and guide us in our fallen state. Here our views are fully expressed by Dr. McCosh : —
1869.] Fundamental Principle of Morals. 181
“ While we stand up for a morality independent of the remedial system of sal- vation, we do not plead for a morality which renders the Bible unnecessary; or, which can justify the sinner apart from the Gospel. At this point we separate entirely from our academic philosophers, who uphold not only the independence but what is a very different thing, the sufficiency of an ethnic or natural morality.” — Pages 340-1.
But if conscience teaches an independent, though insuffi- cient morality, what, whether sufficient or insufficient, stand- ing by itself, or supplemented and completed by Christian revelation, is its fundamental and differential principle? What is that in a morally good and obligatory act or state, which renders it morally good and obligatory ? Some have said that it is conformity to truth, others to the fitness of things, others to the most perfect order, others to the will of God. The obvious defect of all but the last of these attempted definitions is, that they are too broad. They define nothing till we bring into them that morality, of which they are the vaunted definitions. Yirtue is not conformity to all truth, fitness, order ; but only to moral truth, fitness, order. The objection to making the ultimate moral idea, conformity to the will of God, is simply that which lies against founding it in any mere will whatsoever, which might thus, by its own fiat, make and unmake moral distinctions, calling evil good, and good evil ; putting light for darkness, and darkness for light. Yirtue is conformity to the will of God, not as mere will, but as a holy will. That is, his will must be conformed to the true standard of uprightness. Where is this to be found ? Exterior to God ? Then God is subject to a law above, a greater than himself. Against such a conclusion, the most sound and reverent thinkers have always reluctated. They have been reluctant to lay the foundation of morality in mere will on the one hand, and, on the other, to subject the will of God to any authority above himself. How then have they solved the difficulty? Where have they found the prime standard, name, and source of purity to which even the Divine will is conformed? Hot out of or above God, but in the eternal and immaculate purity and rectitude of the Divine nature itself. This is happily put by Bersier as follows : —
11 This problem, the Christian revelation disposes of in the most admirable manner, by founding morality, not upon the will of God, but upon his very
182 Some Recent Discussions on the [Apkil.
nature, in the image of which man was created. Have you reflected on those simple but sublime words of the old Covenant, ‘Be ye holy, for I am holy,’ ? Words which Jesns Christ in his turn reproduced, stamping or marking them with an evangelical accent, when he said, ‘Be ye perfect, even as your Father in heaven is perfect.’ By this word you observe that morality is forever de- tached from the arbitrary, without deposing Divine authority to an inferior place. Goodness thus becomes, in our view, the very expression of the Divine essence; the Gospel becomes, in the beautiful language of Vinet, ‘ the conscience of conscience itself,’ and morality has found an eternal foundation.” — Page 322.
The only other theories of any importance, are the Happiness scheme, including in itself the Utilitarian and Associational theories on the one hand, and the Intrinsic scheme, — that virtue or holiness is in itself a good, and supreme good of a moral being, and not good merely or chiefly as a means to something beyond and better than itself. According to this, right and wrong differ intrinsically, and not merely in their consequences. Rectitude or moral goodness is a simple qual- ity, undefinable, because irresolvable into any simple ele- ments, and having no synonyms plainer than itself. Its original, and standard, is the absolute, eternal, unchangeable rectitude of God himself, as shown above. Than this there can he nothing higher, nothing purer, nothing more authori- tative or obligatory. “ Because he could swear by no greater, he sware by himself” — the First Good, and the First Fair. Rectitude in man’s soul and its acts, is, according to its capacity, conformity to the image of this Divine Goodness. The new man is “ created after God in righteousness and true holiness.” This absolute rectitude is the original supreme excellence of God and all moral creatures, without which all other endow- ments become monstrosities proportioned to their greatness. It is underived, and uncompounded, having nothing more elementary, ultimate, supreme than itself; therefore undefi- nable by aught plainer or simpler than itself. It carries in itself the idea of obligation ; that is, whatever is right is oblig- atory ; whatever is obligatory is right. The two ideas are mutually co-inherent, as much so as life and organization. To ask why we are obliged to do what is right, is as absurd as to ask why a luminous body gives light, why we are obliged to do what wre are obliged to do.
This may be called the catholic Christian doctrine of the
1869.] Fundamental Principle of Morals. 183
ultimate moral idea or ethical principle. The other theories above named, may have found occasional advocates in emi- nent theological or ethical speculatists, and may have had a wide currency for a time ; as in the instances of Paley’s philosophy, and some metaphysical divines and theological parties in New England. But there can be no doubt that these have been exceptional and transient eddyings in the great current of Christian ethical thinking, which has always had its main movement in the line above indicated ; and sooner or later turned back to it, whenever and wheresoever deflected from it.
The most plausible and successful of the schemes which, among Christian thinkers from time to time arise in antago- nism to this, is the happiness scheme above mentioned, in some of its forms. Its plausibility, its power to fascinate, bewilder, and puzzle men, arises from the absolute assurance graven on man’s soul, that happiness must be the accompani- ment or end of holiness. This inseparableness of the two, or certain termination at least of holiness in blessedness, makes it easy to confound them, or rather to make righteousness a mere means or cause of happiness, and to consider this con- duciveness to happiness in right actions as constituting their rightness, its formal nature and essential definition. This is utilitarianism. It makes righteousness a good and right action obligatory, not in itself, but only for its utility as a means to another good out of itself, viz., happiness. Of this utilitarianism there are radically two, and in a qualified sense, three forms : 1. The Epicurean or selfish, which recognizes
virtuous quality in action only as it is, or is deemed, produc- tive of the happiness of the agent. 2. The benevolent scheme, which regards actions as virtuous only in so far as they are productive of the happiness of universal sentient being, the agent included. 3. The scheme of association, which out of the pleasure and pain experienced in, or seen to be produced by certain actions, comes to regard them as good or evil without thinking of the reason, and recognizes no higher right or wrong. This is only one or both of the two preceding schemes in a certain aspect, and may therefore be merged into them. And in the last analysis, the two former may be
184: Some Recent Discussions on the [Aran.,
merged into one. For a priori, if happiness be the only su- preme good, then the supreme obligation of each (if there be any proper moral obligation on this theory), is to get the most of it possible. Still further, with rare exceptions, the advo- cates of the second scheme, found the obligation to seek the happiness of the universe, upon its tendency to promote the happiness of the agent. The ground of this obligation to promote others’ happiness, is simply that thus he will best promote his own. On the other hand, few except some of the lowest materialists, so fully imbrute man as not to main- tain that the promotion of the happiness of other men to some extent, and in some forms, redounds to the happiness of the agent. It is impossible that this theory, in whatever form held, should prevail, without, be the exceptions what they may, re-acting on all Christian doctrines and practical ethics, which have to do with the standard of holiness, and the reality of justice, as an element of moral excellence. They have shown themselves unpropitious to a high-toned and self-sacrificing piety, and to the Scriptural view of the atonement, as a real satisfaction to divine justice, and not a mere governmental expedient. Certainly the history and present state of theology in this country is, as all competent persons know, but a reflex of Dr. McCosli’s portraiture of it, in these respects, in Britain and in Christendom. He says : —
“ A high view of man’s moral nature tends to produce an orthodox theology. I am aware that systems of divinity should be constructed out of the word of God fairly and honestly interpreted. But divines who take low and inadequate views of the moral law, will ever be tempted to explain away those passages in which Christ is represented as truly a sacrifice for sin, and suffering in our room and stead, the just for the unjust. We find in our country that deficient views of the atonement have commonly been associated with imperfect representations of the Divine law and of the evil desert of sin. On the other hand, a high moral theory has ever tended toward an orthodox creed in all matters bearing on the Divine justice, on the punishment of sin, and the expiation of human guilt through the righteousness and sufferings of Jesus Christ.” — Page 330.
The importance of this subject then, ethically and theolo- gically, cannot well be exaggerated. It is, therefore, with the most anxious interest that we turn to Dr. Ilopkins’ new book on this subject. He published his Lectures on Moral Science some years ago, in which we regretted to find, and to evince
1 809.] Fundamental Principle of Morals. 1 35
to our readers, that he had abandoned the doctrine of an in- trinsic morality, as held and propounded by him in his earlier years, and embraced the happiness scheme in substance, however subtle and refined the form.* We had strong hopes that the present volume, containing his still further matured views, would prove that the eminent author had worked himself clear of the objectionable views which were exten- sively deemed so heavy a drawback to his former one. Although it presents his views somewhat farther modified, elaborated, and refined ; still it is a presentation of the same radical system. This it aims to fortify, not materially to alter. While it has this for a principal object, it is also wrought up in a form adapted to teaching, being divided into brief chap- ters, sections, and paragraphs, with appropriate titles and marginal headings, which greatly aid teachers and learners. The second part, too, somewhat quaintly entitled “ Love as Law,” is devoted to practical ethics. This is, on the whole, valuable ; and, with an original and vigorous treatment of various topics, especially society, government, and social duties, has the didactic clearness and terseness so welcome in the class-room and to the general reader. The virtue of terse- ness characterizes the style of the whole book. But we, like many others, cannot say so much for the clearness of the first or theoretical part, with which we wish to chiefly occupy the attention of our readers in what follows. We think the gifted author, in the great strain required to harmonize his theory with all the phases of our moral consciousness, has overdone himself, and run into an abstractness and subtlety quite beyond the scope of general readers ; formidable to beginners in the science, no more than intelligible to adepts after the closest attention, and altogether out of keeping with the author’s usual transparency of thought and expression. We find this a common criticism of this part of the book. This is due obvi- ously not to the author, but to the difficulties of his system, which overmatch the greatest abilities. Nothing but a highly artificial and non-natural way of thinking and expression, can bring the happiness theory into seeming accord with some of
*See Review of Hopkins’ Lectures on Moral Science, in the January number of this Journal for 1863.
186 Some Recent Discussions on the [April,
the most familiar phenomena of onr moral nature. Hence, in place of our author’s usual breadth and massiveness of thought, we find an unusual and unsatisfactory astuteness and subtlety. But without further preliminaries, let us find what he maintains, and whether his new presentation of his system ought to make us converts to it. We hardly need say that, on account of the present or final coincidence of holiness and happiness, a large amount of phraseology is equally in place, alike on the scheme which distinguishes the two, and that which makes one merely a means or cause of the other. It is further to be remarked, that all those arguings and appeals in behalf of the happiness scheme so profusely employed by util- itarian philosophers, which imply that happiness is the only good, are simply instances of petitio principii. The very issue joined is whether happiness is the only good, or the only ultimate and supreme good ; also whether virtue is a supreme good, or good at all except as it is causative of happiness. This assumption in some of its forms stocks their armory. It seems quite plausible and conclusive to iterate and re-iterate usque ad nauseam , how is an action right, unless it is good ; and how is it good, unless it is good for something ; and what is it good for, if it does no good? Implying the while, that it can do no good, if it do not promote happiness. Eliminate this class of reasonings from the argument under re- view, or any other that we have ever seen of any power on the same side, and you eviscerate it. Its life and strength are gone out of it. All that is said by our author about ends, and the necessity that right action should be directed to good ends, comes to the same thing. Every thing hinges on this. What is a good end, and is there any supremely good end but happi- ness ? This is the very thing to be disproved, before argument resting upon the assumption of the contrary can have the weight of a feather. What then does Dr. Ilopkins assume to be the only real and ultimate good ? lie says affirmatively : —
“ We see from the above, the necessity of an end, and of a supreme end. But the word includes not merely an idea in the intellect of something that can be comprehended and attained by the use of means, there is also an element in it addressed to our emotive nature. To be chosen by us, there must be in it, or seem to be, a good. Tracing it back we shall find that there must be something valuable for its own sake — something good in itself, and recognized as such
1869.]
Fundamental Principle of Morals.
187
within the sensibility. What then is a good ? Strictly there is no good that is not subjective, and so known as such within the consciousness; but it will accord more with the cast of our language, and tend to a clearer apprehension of the subject, if we say that all good is either objective or subjective. An objec- tive good is any thing so correlated to a conscious being as to produce subjective good. Subjective good is some form of enjoyment or satisfaction in the consciousness.” — Page 51.
The supreme end of man then is good, and this good is sub- jective enjoyment or satisfaction, or that which will produce it. The supporters of this scheme have usually, in logical con- sistency, defined holiness as that conduct in a moral being which is a means of happiness. Dr. Hopkins dissents from this word “means” and substitutes “ cause,” but without any essential difference as to the main issue. For in regard to this it is really a distinction without a difference. He says : “ The holiness is not a means of happiness but the cause. It is the person choosing in accordance with the end for which God made him, and as thus choosing, worthy of respect, of admi- ration, of complacent love, of veneration. This is no ‘ dirt- philosophy,’ or 4 bread and butter philosophy,’ or 4 utilitarian philosophy.’ Who shall say that this is low, mercenary, or unworthy ? ” — Page 54.
We know not, but it seems that the honored author recog- nizes the identity or affiliation of his scheme with that at which such epithets are sometimes hurled. He attempts to parry the charge of utilitarianism thus : 44 Whatever is useful, then, can have value only as it is related to the end which it may be used to promote. A plow is useful, but only as it is related to the value of a crop. Of course a system which should place obligation to choose an end on the ground of an intrinsic value that should have no end beyond itself, and so no utility, could not properly be charged with being a system of utility. The word utility expresses a relation — a relation between that which is valuable in itself and the means of obtaining it.” — Pages 10-11. Surely this discrimination of his system from utilitarianism amounts to nothing, or is too tenu- ous to be comprehended. The very pith and essence of that system is,, that it makes the moral rectitude not a good, much less the highest good in itself, but valuable only as a means (it matters not if Dr. Hopkins prefers to say “ cause ”) of
188
' Some Recent Discussions on the
[April,
another good, viz., happiness or enjoyment. Whether this has value in or beyond itself is immaterial to the present issue. It is enough that the sole good of virtue lies in its being a means or cause of this happiness. If this differs from utilitari- anism, it is by less than the shadow of a shade.
But the true character of Dr. Hopkins’ system appears quite as decisively in what he repudiates as in what he espouses. He rejects the doctrine of Prof. Haven and a large class of writer’s, that “ the term right expresses a simple and ultimate idea ; it is therefore incapable of analysis and definition.” — Page 20. As a caveat against false inferences, we take occa- sion to say that we too, for reasons already given, dissent from another statement quoted from Dr. Haven, that moral dis- tinctions “ do not originate in the Divine character.” Dr. Hopkins says further : “ It is therefore impossible that any form, or quality, or characteristic of choice, any virtue, or goodness, or holiness should be the ground of the obligation to choose.” — Page 26. “The choice may be right or wrong, but by no possibility can the obligation depend upon any quali- ty in the act of choosing.” — Page 76. It certainly requires no little of ingenious and subtle refining to reconcile such lan- guage with the dictates of an unsophisticated conscience. And what follows shows at least the highly artificial character of the system.
“ Right has commonly been supposed to be the ultimate, or rather to be the moral idea. It is said, and that is perhaps the popular system now, that right is a necessary and independent idea ; that the distinctions of right and wrong are inherent in the nature of things, in the same way as mathematical ideas are independent and necessarily involved in the relations of space and quantity. But right and wrong morally considered can have nothing to do with any nature of things existing necessarily,” &c. — Page 77.
We submit that the following simple and straightforward passages from the article of Dr. McCosh are vastly more in- telligible and true to nature, than a volume of such wire-drawn refinings. They truly echo the utterances of our moral nature, and need not the gloss or exegesis put upon them by Dr. Hop- kins (page 116), in order to speak their own meaning to every unperverted conscience.
“I hold that there is an inherent and essential distinction between good and evil, just as there is a distinction between truth and error. Gratitude to God is
1869.] Fundamental Principle of Morals. 189
as certainly a virtue, as that ‘things which are equal to the same thing are equal to each other ’ is a truth. Rebellion against God is as certainly a sin as that ‘ two parallel lines will meet’ is a falsehood. I believe that the mind sees at once and intuitively the distinction between good and evil, as it sees the dis- tinction between truth and falsehood. This it does by a power which we call the moral reason or conscience. And if there be an eternal, an indelible dis- tinction between truth and error, good and evil, and if sin be of evil desert, and deserving of punishment, the question is irresistibly pressed upon us, how is this sin which God hates, and must hate, to be forgiven? and how is man, who has committed this sin. and is conscious of guilt, and sensible of alienation, to be reconciled to God ?” — Pages 338-9.
"We do not deem it worth while to notice any arguments founded on the etymology of the word “right.” Fallacies of etymology are of old the cheap defence of what has no bet- ter support. It has been argued that truth is variable because derived from “trow” to believe, and belief is variable. With equal cogency it is argued that right means the right way to happiness, because it means originally a straight line, or the shortest way to something. The test of the meaning of words ■ is not derivation but present use.
Much is made by writers of this class, of the Apostle's declaration, “ God is love,” as indicating that the essence of the Divine character is benevolence to the exclusion of every moral attribute not included therein, even distributive jus- tice. But is he love any more than he is truth, holiness, jus- tice, wisdom, and do not all these attributes qualify and con- dition each other ? Dr. Shedd 3ays, with great truth and co- gency : — “ The inspired assertion that, ‘ God is a consuming fire’ (Heb. xii. 29), is just as categorical and unqualified as the inspired assertion that ‘ God is love’ (1 John, iv. 8), or the in- spired assertion that £ God is light ’ ( 1 John, i. 5). Hence it is as inaccurate to resolve all the Divine emotions into love, as it would be to resolve them all into wrath. The truth is, that it is the Divine essence alone, and not any one particular attri- bute, that can be logically regarded as the unity in which all the characteristic qualities of the Deity centre and inhere.” * Indeed Dr. Hopkins recognizes the “ finding the ideas of obligation, right, justice, in their place as essential and ineradicable parts of our frame.” — Page 114. “ Goodness is
* Bib. Sacra, 1856, p. 720.
190 Some Recent Discussions on the [April,
good in itself- — intrinsically so. It is worthy of approbation on its own account. It is the only thing that can be com- manded or approved.” — Page 115. This seems in a breath to sweep down the structure which had been so laboriously erected. It seems to restore all that had been taken from us. But in a sentence or two he shows that this goodness is such from its “ relation to good” — and, as already shown, with him this good is happiness. Yet he calls it a “holy happiness.’ So, after all, actions tending to happiness are right only on condition that it be a “ holy happiness.” Founding virtue, therefore, in conformity or subserviency to happiness, encoun- ters the same difficulty as founding it in conformity to truth, or the titness of things, or perfect order. All virtue is con- formity to each of these. But not all conformity to these is virtue. There is much order, truth, fitness, conformity to which is not moral goodness. Conformity to moral truth, order, fitness alone is moral excellence. This is shown by Dr. Hopkins (pages 12-15). But it is clear that the same objection lies against founding virtue on mere happiness. It must be a “ holy happiness.” All these attempts to derive the moral idea from any of these elements, presuppose that it has first been put into them. Defining it by them is impossi- ble until it has first been joined to them as a differentia. It is no mere evolution from sensations of pleasure or pain. Dr. McCosh says, quite to the purpose : —
“ Ethical philosophy has a work to do. It must show that the ideas and con- victions which we have in regard to moral good, and the distinction between good and evil, cannot be furnished by associated sensations; but are sanctioned by our very constitution, and the God who gave us our constitution. The pro- cess by which they affect to generate our moral beliefs is like that of the old alchemists, who, when they put earth into the retort, never could get any thing but earth, and who could get gold only by surreptitiously introducing some substance containing gold. The philosopher’s stone of this modern psycholo- gy is of the same character as that employed in mediaeval physics. If they put jn sensations only, as some do, they never have any thing but sensations, and a “dirt philosophy,” as it has been called, is the product. If gold is got, as it has been by some, it is because it has been quietly introduced by the person who triumphantly exhibits it.” — Page 34G.
In the present woik, the author advances the same views on the morality of the affections, desires, volitions, and choice as in his Lectures on Moral Science. Here, too, his system and
i
1869.] Fundamental Principle of Morals. 191
terminology are quite subtle and artificial. He allows respon- sibility for such spontaneous exercises as are the effect of choice, while yet they may be the cause of volition. How is this? He sharply distinguishes choice from volition. Choice is that act of the will which is generic, and chcosing an end, determines all subordinate exercises, spontaneous and voli- tional, in subordination to itself. Volitions are the subor- dinate executive acts of will in pursuing that end. All spontaneous exercises of desire and affection, and all volitions likewise, are determined by, they take their moral character from, the great generic choice which is the good or bad tree of which they are the fruit. All moral character begins with this generic choice. Nothing moral can lie back of the will which is not itself a product of the will. The order is this — First, the generic choice of God or the world with which moral character begins. Secondly, the spontaneous desires and affections begotten by this and receiving their moral qual- ity from it. Thirdly, the specific executive volitions prompted by these spontaneous appetencies, and taking on their moral aspect from them. Dr. Hopkins meets the obvious objection, that we are conscious that our volitions are prompted by our desires, and receive their moral character from them, by granting the fact, but denying the inference that these desires per se have moral quality. They acquire it in turn from the great generic choice which determines them. “We are responsible for them/’ he admits, “ but only through their relation to that generic and permanent choice which deter- mines character, and in which character consists.”- — Page 67. “ Thus when a man has become fully a miser, his desires and affections, his hopes and fears all centre in his treasure, and become motives to him in a multitude of subordinate choices. They are all spontaneous, he is responsible for them, and they are all sinful ; but this is only because they are the indi- rect result , not, as Dr. ( Archibald ) Alexander seems to sup- pose,, of volition, hut of choice. If the man had not originally chosen money as his supreme end, there would have been no such spontaneous product and no such guilt. The difficulty has been in the failure to perceive the relation of one generic and radical choice to subsequent spontaneous action, the
192 Some Recent -Discussions on the [ApRir,,
character of which is yet determined by the choice.” — Page 66.
On all this we remark : —
1. That this scheme seems to us to approximate closely to that of the late Dr. N. IT. Taylor. The generic choice seems to be one with the “ generic or governing purpose ” of that celebrated divine which first originates and ever constitutes the character. The relation of the desires and spontaneous moral exercises to the will is substantially the same in both schemes, only that the distinction between choice and volition is peculiar to Dr. Hopkins. The ultimate ethical idea too, as founded in happiness, is for substance the same in each scheme, although, as in some of Dr. Taylor’s late writings, so more persistently by Dr. Hopkins, it, as sometimes is true of vice, loses half its deformity, by losing all its grossness. Still the doctrine is there as a premise for all its proper logical, ethical, and religious consequences. Both agree withal that man has no moral character save in his voluntary acts, or the products thereof, and consequently that men have no moral character sinful or holy, till the formation of the generic choice, in which they choose their chief end.
2. When and how does this generic choice occur histori- cally ? Does the memory of any man run back thereto ? AVe trow not. Dr. Hopkins tells us, “ this supreme end need not be, and is not, known in its abstract and general form; but obligation is affirmed the moment there is furnished an occa- sion for choice in any specific case involving the end.” — Pages 69-70. It appears then that the first sinful choice is made without consciousness or design of its generic, or governing, or permanent character. It is merely a manifestation of the character already dominant in the soul.
3. And it derives its own moral character from the corrup- tion of the soul that prompts it — else it would be characterless, as the subordinate volitions, which Dr. Hopkins shows are determined and take their moral character from the desires. This is true of all acts of will, whether called choices or voli- tions. Indeed it is explicitly asserted by Dr. Hopkins himself when it becomes convenient in refuting a theory which lie rejects. He says (p. 17), “ Hence, it will follow again, if the
193
1869.] Fundamental Principle of Morals.
will of God be the "round of obligation, that God lias no mor- al character. Choice , volition , will , are hut the expression of character. If there he nothing hack of these for them, to express, there can he no character .” Has be not struck down at a blow the whole fabric he has so ingeniously reared ? And does he not thus leave intact the psychology and ethics of desire, will, and affection which be so earnestly, and at times skillfully assails ? And if such language as the follow- ing makes havoc of the grand ethical idea of the book, in regard to the relations of happiness to holiness, we cannot help it. He says, “We love; but we do not will the joy that is in it, and that cannot be separated from it. In no case can we will either joy or sorrow, happiness or, indeed, any ultimate end.” — Page 60. May we not, then, love right- eousness and righteous acts, without “ willing the joy that is in it,” and irrespective of their relations to happiness?
We have done. It is a great trial to us to be constrained to criticise the productions of a man whom we regard so highly as Dr. Hopkins ; or productions which have so much real merit as wTe find in this volume. But there is no alterna- tive. If the principles involved are important enough for him to advocate, they are important enough for those who reject them to refute.
We have no time to dwell upon Mr. Bain’s ultimate moral idea. As emerging from the materialistic character of his philosophy it is, and indeed must be, one form of the happiness scheme. He says, “ From the nature or definition of will, pure and proper, the motives or ends of action are our Pleasures and Pains.” This being one variety of the scheme already examined, stands or falls with it, and therefore requires no farther notice.
194
Planting of the American Churches. [April,
Art. III. — Planting of the American Churches.
To the success of the great Reformation a most important condition was the discovery of the AFestern Continents. It was no success of Protestant principle to have secured for Protestant nations permission to exist. The peace of West- phalia only asserted for them an independent place among the powers of Europe. It did not liberate the individual con- science. • That doctrine which was the germ of the Reforma- tion had yet no free development. Its growth was a conflict with intolerance. Romanists denied it, and Protestants did not dare to carry it fully into practice, if even in the zeal of controversy they did not entirely lose sight of it.
Freedom of the individual conscience in matters of faith, which aims not to oppress an opponent, but to establish equal rights with him, could not he safely allowed, when forces were ready to seize upon every advantage it offered to work the ruin of those who held it. And the oppression which makes even wise men mad, continued in most quarters to exasperate the weaker party to inconsistencies. Notwithstanding the efforts of many good and great men among them, it was diffi- cult for nations having their residence on the Mediterranean Sea to emancipate themselves from the thraldom of opinions and authorities which had grown up and prevailed through all their history, enforced, if not to a great degree created, by their geographical relations. Some other channel of com- merce than that on which Italy and Spain had successively been masters, was needed to divert and change the old current of ideas. The limits of thought were greatly extended when commerce betook herself to the paths of the ocean. But no nation has ever adapted itself to that new and larger measure, nor reaped corresponding profit from it without being pre- pared therefor by the adoption of Reformation principles. The experiments have been made on a large scale, and the dem- onstration is indisputable. Although Catholic settlements were the earliest on the shores of the ocean, and still cover the greatest extent of country, the Protestant alone have sue-
195
1869.] Planting of the American Churches.
ceeded in setting up a state of society and a civil polity in keeping with the breadth of a world’s commerce. And upon the New Continent, for the first time, and still alone, was Protestant principle consistently carried into practice.
About twenty-five years before the publication of Luther’s theses, Columbus for the first time beheld the shores of a AVest Indian island. Five years later, English mariners discovered the coast of the Northern Continent. And succeeding ex- plorations, continued for a hundred years, ascertained the re- sources of the new country to present it as an asylum from the increasing severity of religious persecution. While some parts of it were rich, and offered large rewards to industry, others were sought by its settlers merely as a refuge.
The Southern Continent, Central America, Mexico, and most of the West India islands were claimed by Spain and Portugal as the gift of the pope. And on all those coasts the faith of Rome was planted and enforced with its utmost severity. The natives of those countries beheld in the cross the symbol of oppression, perfidy, and the most appalling barbarity ; but in the course of time they were all subdued to the dominion of Romanism or exterminated. From California to Cape Horn the pope ruled over the consciences of all whom European convictions had reached. But on the eastern coast, notwith- standing the discovery of Florida by Ponce de Leon, upon which a claim was subsequently urged, he never succeeded in planting his jurisdiction within the bounds now possessed by the United States. Discovered by Protestant mariners, that tract of country was, from the first, set apart for the abode of religious freedom. The colony of Maryland, though papal in religion, was subject to Protestant government. By the time when reactionary Romanism had reached its greatest success on the European Continent, and the British isles bad come under the rule of a narrow and intolerant dynasty, the shores of North America, looking toward Europe, were suffi- ciently wTell explored to hold out abundant offers to refugees from oppression. *
It was during the reign of the Stuart dynasty in England, and, as respects the Continent of Europe, from the commence- ment of the dissensions, out of which arose the thirty years VOL. xli. — NO II. . 93
196 Planting of the American Churches. [April,
war, the formation of the two antagonist leagues, until the revocation of the Edict of Nantes, that the earliest and most important of these settlements were made. Though numerous, and somewhat heterogeneous in character, a certain spontane- ous order operated in them, which presents the basis of a classification. The history is that of five different groups of colonies. Virginia, New York, and Massachusetts were the earliest planted, in 1607, 1613, and 1620 respectively. A certain analogy exists between the history of the first and the last. As the settlements on the James River spread out west- ward and northward, but chiefly southward into North Carolina; so the group planted on Massachusetts Bay sent out its branches westward and northward into New Hampshire but chiefly southward into Rhode Island and Connecticut, and these again secondary offshoots into Long Island and New Jersey. The colonies of both groups were joined by new emigrants from the mother country. To the north of Massa- chusetts, the earliest colonies of New Hampshire and Maine, and to the north of Virginia, the Roman Catholic colony of Maryland, were added about the same time, constituting definite limits in that direction.
The country lying between these two groups, namely, the coast of New York. New Jersey, and Delaware, was about the same date settled by Dutch, Danes, and Swedes. In 1655 the Dutch reduced the Danish and Swedish settlers ; and in 1661, the English conquered the Dutch, and thereby united their northern group of colonies with the southern.
A fourth group had its beginning in South Carolina, in the settlement made at Port Royal in 1670, from which proceed- ed the founders of Charleston in 1680. Other settlements soon clustered around these points. Subsequently other colonies went out from them westward and northward ; but most numerously, as far as they went beyond the bounds of South Carolina, southward, into what became afterward Georgia, and uniting with emigrants directly from the moth- er country. '
The fifth group is that of the Quaker settlements in Penn- sylvania and adjoining regions of New Jersey, constituted by William Penn in 1682, but actually commenced earlier, and
197
1869.] Planting of the American Churches.
whose progress, restrained on the north and south, proceeded directly westward.
Thus, before the revocation of the Edict of Nantes, the whole coast from Maine to Georgia had come under British rule, in five connected groups of colonies. And the principal centres of population were accordingly the chief cities of those groups ; a distinction which, for the most part, is still retained. For although Jamestown has disappeared, and Baltimore has outstripped Richmond, yet in all the other groups, the colonial centres of population — Charleston, Phila- delphia, New York, and Boston, respectively — are the cen- tres of population still.
During the same period, France had taken possession of the territories farther north ; and Spain and Portugal, one or the other, claimed all that lay farther south.
Accordingly, as respects religion, both to the north and south of those British colonies, Roman Catholicism had been set up and enforced. Under British rule alone lay the lands reserved for Protestantism. Farther north the history of Protestantism did not begin until after the British conquest of those territories.
Maryland was first settled by Roman Catholics; hut her charter was drawn up and granted by a Protestant power. And ere one generation had entirely passed away, Protestants had secured dominion there also, and Lord Baltimore had himself become an Episcopalian.
As to the type of doctrine which prevailed, it was almost entirely that of the Reformed. Lutherans were few, consist- ing chiefly of the Danes and Swedes of New Jersey and Delaware. But much difference existed on the subject of Church government and ordinances. In the New England group of settlements, Congregationalism prevailed ; in the Virginia group, Episcopacy. In the Carolina group, Episco- palians and Presbyterians were mingled, without being united. And the Pennsylvania settlements, with several in New Jer- sey, were of the Society of Friends. Congregationalism was made the established religion of New England ; and Episco- pacy of Virginia. And Quakerism, though not properly es- tablished, was the ruling creed in Pennsylvania. None oi
198
Planting of the American Churches. [Apkil,
the original groups were founded by English-speaking Pres- byterians, although persons of Presbyterian persuasion were to be found in all.
Presbyterianism was first planted in this country by the Dutch. And the beginning of its strength was New York. But from that quarter its operation was limited by the nar- row range of a language foreign to most of the provinces. And soon after New York came under the dominion of Ens-
c5
land, the Episcopal Church was established there also. And Presbyterianism had no legally recognized place in the land.
It was in 1662 that Anglican Episcopacy was fully estab- lished in Virginia ; and in 1703, extended over the Carolinas, where, although from the beginning the religion favored by Government, it had not, until then, been authoritatively im- posed. Thus by the earlier years of the eighteenth century, the jurisdiction of the English Church was enforced from Georgia to the borders of New England, passing over Penn- sylvania and having but few adherents in New Jersey. The establishment of Episcopacy was the act of the British Govern- ment and Church in England; that of Congregationalism was effected by the colonists for themselves.
Episcopacy, though thus favored and enforced by the civil authoriiies, did not become correspondently popular. Its dependence upon the Church in England withheld it from full and true harmony with the colonists and from the com- pleteness of its own proper form. There was not one bishop in the country. Relatively it declined through the middle of the eighteenth century until the opening of the Revolutionary war, when it almost entirely broke down. Most of its minis- ters, as they were all missionaries of the English Church, being in sympathy with the English cause, then returned home. After peace was restored, it was reorganized on a new basis, and very properly, with a new name, as the Protestant Epis- copal Church.
Congregationalism proper is the growth of New England. It was -developed, if not born there. Enjoying a full and ex- clusive dominion, it reached its appropriate development en- tirely in harmony with the views of the people. But it ob-
199
1SG9.] Planting of the American Churches.
tained little |)lace except in New England, and where carried by New England people. And many of them, when they left the bounds of their native province, changed their ecclesias- tical relations. Nor did Congregationalism in all the New England colonies present exactly the same form. In some the churches were only related to one another by Associations, while others recognized the more intimate bond of Consocia- tions. The former prevailed in the northern and the latter in the southern of those colonies, at least in those of Connecti- cut, while Independency maintained itself in Rhode Island.
Presbyterianism came into this country by various ways, hut chiefly by two: as connected with the Congregational settlements, and by emigration from Scotland and Ireland. Subsequently to the revocation of the Edict of Nantes, Hugue not refugees added to that force, especially in South Caro- lina. But both Huguenot and Dutch, as well as Welsh, who were not insignificant in numbers in Pennsylvania, failed of adding much to their cause, by conversion, on account of their foreign language and name. The growth of Presbyte- rianism was without support of Government, if not in spite of its opposition.
Many Puritans of New England were Presbyterians by preference, and as they migrated southward into Long Island and New Jersey, their churches assumed more of a Presby- terian form. In Virginia and Maryland the number of Pres- byterian dissenters, consisting chiefly of exiles from Scotland and the north of Ireland, had by the year 1680 become such as to justify them in asking ministers to be sent to them from the mother country. After that petition was complied with, they increased more rapidly. From Maryland their congre- gations spread northward into Delaware and Pennsylvania. Under the Episcopal establishment they were severely re- stricted ; but found freedom and protection under the liberal rule of the Quakers.
These two Presbyterian streams, proceeding one from the north and the other from the south, united and blended in New Jersey and neighboring parts of Pennsylvania. The first church of Newark came out of New England ; the first Presbyterian church in Maryland came out of Ireland an d
200
Planting of the American Churches. [Apkil,
Scotland ; and the first in Philadelphia came partly out of New England and partly from Scotland and Ireland. Sub- sequently, large emigrations from the latter countries into New Jersey and Pennsylvania strengthened the cause. And a generation later, Presbyterianism in New Jersey completely overbalanced all other denominations. The adjoining city of Philadelphia, with its religious freedom, presented the most convenient centre for organization. And there the first Pres- bytery was formed!
In Yirginia and the Carolinas, where the stringency of the establishment was greatest, the Presbyterian cause also pros- pered, and ultimately became the superior, although the im- pediments which interposed, for many years prevented the churches in that quarter from joining the Presbytery. The Presbyterians of South Carolina, cut off from their brethren of the middle colonies by distance and otherwise, long retain- ed their original ecclesiastical relations to Scotland, and did not join the American General Assembly until after the beginning of the present century.
Through the middle and southern provinces, during the greater part of the eighteenth century, Presbyterianism was eminently the popular religion, although lying under some restraints of the civil government. The great revival which spread over the country about the middle of that century, brought together and fused into one the scattered evangelical elements. Although it pervaded the Churches from Georgia to Massachusetts, it was in the middle provinces, and especial- ly in New Jersey, that its most benign effects appeared. A temporary division on the subject intensified the zeal and activity of the parties, while it put a check upon the disposi- tion to extravagance on both sides; and when they reunited it was cordially and completely. The Presbyterian Church, which had previously been feeble and scattered, emerging from chaos and oppression, beheld itself, in the issue of the revival, a numerous and fully organized brotherhood, with its own college, for the education of ministers, planted at Princeton, near the centre of its operations.
But the same revival introduced two other actors on the scene. The Moravians appeared as missionaries, and only
201
1869.] Planting of the American Churches.
planted missionary stations and schools with a missionary object in view. But these occupied important points over the whole length of the country. A few Methodists of ti e Wesleyan connection came to America between 1760 and 1770, and ere the latter date had formed a small society in New York. Their numbers rapidly increased, and several congregations were collected before the opening of the Revo- lutionary war. Their first conference met in Philadelphia in 1773. Subsequently to 1784, Methodism, under a new and independent organization, made accelerated progress, and in the course of time assumed to itself the larger part of that popular favor, which had before, in the Middle States, and the West, been extended to Presbyterianism. It followed with great effect the movement of the new settlements westward.
The Baptists came to this country, in the first instance, among the Puritans of New England. Expelled from Massa- chusetts, they formed, on their own principles, the province of Rhode Island. Subsequent emigration enlarged their num- bers. While Rhode Island continued to be their asylum, they also planted new societies in Pennsylvania and Dela- ware. In colonial times they were comparatively few, being under persecution in most of the provinces. The great increase of their number has taken place chiefly since the beginning of the present century.
Thus, the first churches planted in these provinces were the Episcopal in Virginia, the Dutch Reformed in New York, and the Congregational in Massachusetts. Then came Roman- ism in Maryland, Lutheranism in New Jersey and Delaware, the Baptists in Rhode Island, and the Quakers in Pennsyl- vania and New Jersey.
Romanism and Lutheranism had a brief rule in colonial times, and were soon submerged. Their present proportions in this country are due to subsequent immigrations.
After the Revolution of 1688, the free and ruling sects were the Episcopal, Quaker, and Congregational, while the Presbyterian, mingled with all, but without a legal recogni- tion anywhere, gradually rose by force of a certain popular favor, and by immigration from Scotland, Ireland, and France. By the revival of religion which commenced about
202 The Novel and Novel Heading. [April,
1734, its position as one of the larger denominations was fully settled. But the same revival gave rise to the Methodists, who began to arrive from England, after its fervor had sub- sided, as the Moravians had commenced operations at its be- ginning.
At the opening of our national history, the principal de- nominations were the Congregational in the north ; Episco- pal in the middle and south ; Presbyterian, chiefly in the middle, hut also numerous in the south ; the Quaker in the middle, the Methodist in the middle and south, and the Bap- tist in the north and middle. National independence opened the way to entire religious freedom. Not immediately, hut in the course of a short time, Government support and restric- tions alike were withdrawn, and all denominations thrown upon the presentation of their own merits.
Art. IY. — The Novel and Novel Reading.
Coleridge once said, “There have been three silent revolu- tions in England : — first, when the professions fell off from the church ; secondly, when literature fell off from the professions ; and thirdly, when the press fell off from literature.” Had he lived till the present day he might have added a fourth : — when the masses fell off from the literature of fact and gave themselves to that of fiction. We, of the present, live in what has been aptly styled the Era of the Novel. Even the highest genius, if in this day it wrould gain the ear of that great audi- ence, the masses, must consent to clothe its inspirations in novel form. The historian must rehearse for the present generation, as he has done for the past, the story of the nations : if his narrative be only profound and deep-seeing, in its philosophy of national life and vicissitudes, the few put it up in library style and give it a place of quiet on their shelves ; if his tale be interesting as fiction and vivid as the drama, everybody reads it with eagerness. The poet must sing as of yore : if his song be “ In Memoriam,” or “ A Drama of Exile,” its music is shut up in rich binding and given a place of honor for the binding’s
I860.]
The Novel and Novel Reading.
203
sake on the centre-table ; if it be a “ Maud,” an “ Aurora Leigh,” an “Evangeline,” or a “Ivathrina,” everybody listens to it and applauds. So to the end of the category, the demand is everywhere for novelty, and genius must needs be content if it succeeds in getting even a few scraps of sound philosophy or theology taken by the masses through the medium of some startling theory tilling a book of generous dimensions, or in bringing a stray truth of science before the people in a series of lectures or papers, bv an array of wonderful experiments or some ride on a comet through the planetary worlds, or in mediating to a popular assembly by stealth in the pulpit a shred of Bible doctrine, by forty minutes of brilliant illus- trations.
Almost half a century ago, Professor Wilson, in“Xoctes Ambrosianae,” wrote of novels as compared with the drama, “ They are better fitted for the present state of public taste. The public are merely capable of strong sensations, but of nothing which requires knowledge, taste, or judgment.” That was written of a British public from which we are removed by half a century of the almost undisputed reign of the novel in all its forms, and by the short voyage — ever growing shorter— across the Atlantic. This subject has, therefore, become one of such practical moment, one touching so many and so vital social and religious interests, that the Christian public can no longer leave its discussion to the secular and Satanic press. It demands of us consideration, — serious, earnest consideration. We propose to discuss the novel and novel reading in the light of the great principles which rule in the workings of the human mind, and of the greater di- vine principles which should rule in the Christian world.
What is a novel? The name — meaning simply something new— is as indefinite as it can well be, and is just as applica- ble to any thing else as to any form of literature. Evidently it requires to be more nearly defined by aid of its synonyms, Romance and Fiction. The first of these names, romance , carries us back to the middle ages. Percy, in his “ Reliques,” tells us the origin of its application to fictitious literature. When, in the ninth century, the Latin tongue ceased to be spoken in France, it was succeeded by the Romance tongue,
204
The Novel and Novel Reading. [April,
a mixture of the language of the Franks and had Latin. A hook written in this language came to he called a Romans book. The songs of the Troubadours, the most popular com- positions, soon appropriated the title to themselves and became the romans or romanse hooks, or simply the romances of that age. The romance was a wild, extravagant story of events warlike or otherwise, told either in prose or verse, and drawing its interest from the theme of love. The other term, fiction , originally denoted the act of mental picturing, whether of something real or fanciful, and then the result of that act. It has come to denote a portraiture of the world of unreality summoned up by the fancy and the imagination. A novel, as more nearly defined by its synonyms, has in it these essen- tials : — the portraiture of something new, falling within the domain of fancy or imagination, with its interest centring in love.
But the sphere of the novel may be defined more clearly by assigning to it its place in Literature. That suggestive though mystical and erratic w'riter, Emerson, has said, “ there must always he a reporter of the doings of the miraculous spirit of life which everywhere throbs and works.” Barring its side- glance toward Pantheism, we accept his dictum as giving a glimpse of the great truth, that all the world, real and ideal, must be reported for mankind ; which truth has its correlative in that other and no less important, that the human soul is made with its expressive faculties to report all the world, in its varied ways and from its diverse points of view. The com- plete portraiture or report of the world by this expressive power in man — this faculty of discourse — is embodied in Lit- erature, in its widest sense ; in the literature of the intellect and the heart, of the taste and the imagination, of the con- science and the religious nature, of the real and the ideal.
Using, as the principle of division, the aim of the report- ing or portraiture, we have three great subdivisions of Lit- erature : — Oratory, Representative Discourse, and Poetry. The novel belongs to the second of these subdivisions. Pure Representative Discourse embraces, 1st, History, and 2d, Scientific Treatises, including the Essay or Dissertation. Un- der History, “ the subject of which is some fact or event, single
I860.] The Novel and Novel Reading. 205
or continuous, in nature, as Natural History , or among men, as History proper, we include Biography , the subject of which is facts in individual experience, and Travels , which is hut a more specific department of biography, having facts of a specific character in individual experience for its subject ; ” and Works of Fiction, the subject of which is some simulated fact or event , which is the product of the fancy or imagina- tion and usually has its place in the sphere of domestic life.
Says Coleridge, in his “ Biographia Literaria,” “ the fancy combines, the imagination creates.” Making use of this dis- tinction, we have two departments of works of fiction, the Romance proper , the product of the fancy; and the Novel proper , the product of the imagination. By further analysis we have, under Romance proper, 1. The Apologue , including the Fable and the Allegory ; 2. The Extravaganza ; and 3. The Sentimental Romance , the ordinary love and marriage tale : — and under the Novel proper, as giving something new by art creation, I. The Novel of Domestic Life , with domestic life predominant, including (1.) The Historico-descriptive , which deals with national phases of men and manners; and, (2.) The Home Life , delineating either customs or character; and II. The Ldea Novel , with the jtale of domestic life sub- ordinated and made the vehicle of some idea, including (1.) The Didactic Novel , with the idea itself ruling, embracing the political, social, moral, and religious; and (2.) The Artis- tic Novel , with the idea subordinated to the form of beauty in which it is clothed.
It becomes evident, from a glance at this analysis, that the theme of Domestic Life is to be regarded as an essential in works of fiction of the higher, imaginative class : for although — in the ITistorico-descriptive form — the novel rises into the same sphere with history, it is not for the purpose of record- ing public events, but to portray national phases of manners or of character as exhibited in the domestic life of a people or an age ; and although rising — in the novel of Home Life — into the sphere of biography, it does not like it pass along the whole period of life and exhibit its events only to portray a single character, but selects a particular period of life, and groups the incidents and characters around one centralizing
206 The Novel and Novel Reading. [April,
interest in domestic life — that of Love. So it appears, in like manner, that the story of Love is bound up in the essence of the modern novel and is not a mere conventional appendage of it. It will be wise to make due account of this, for we have so long been accustomed to see this theme indentiiied, in the yellow-covered literature, with delineations of basest passion, that we have almost lost our sense of its inherent nobility and its sublime place in God’s world. Let it be clearly under- stood and deeply pondered then, that Love is the grand climac- teric, the central interest, in domestic life. God has made it so, by basing home and society upon it, in ordaining marriage as its final end. Nothing needs more to be portrayed as God made and intended it to be, for upon the purity, power, and sacredness infused into the love-life of man and bound up with it, through the divine influences of Christ’s religion, the character of society must in great measure depend.
The Modern Novel is the response of our age, and its ac- knowledgment, made to this universal and controlling social instinct : for in it, society, history, the world revolve round the sacred centre of love ; and without this centre of light and attraction the novel, most brilliant in all other respects, would be but as the heavens with the sun blotted out. Peter Bayne, in his essay on “ The Modern Novel,” writes : “ The novel is scientifically definable as a domestic history, in which the whole interest and all the facts are made to combine in the evolution of a tale of love.” Adding its origin in the imagi nation to this statement, we think it may be accepted as em- bracing the essence of the Novel proper. This is evident in the case of the two classes of what we have called the Novel of Domestic Life ; and in what we have termed the Idea Novel, though in all its various forms having some ulterior end, didactic or artistic, in view, the dependence for awakening and sustaining interest is still clearly upon the central theme of love, at least until we come to the point of shading off into the book of lectures or the art essay.
But some of these classes of Fiction, which we have found to exist, may not be of any value ; individual works of a valuable class may be worthless. What are to be the tests of the kinds of novel and of the individual novel of any kind?
1869.]
The Novel and Novel Reading.
207
When Kaled wrote to Caliph Omar, inquiring what disposi- tion should be made of the Alexandrian library, the caliph replied : “ These books are in conformity with the Koran or they are not ; if they are not, they are pernicious ; if they are, the Koran is sufficient without them, so let them be destroyed.” It was a decidedly convenient way of dealing with that vast collection, which if it only existed to-day would, perhaps, be more valuable than all other libraries combined. The ages since have found fault with the Moslem’s logic. We have be- fore us a library quite as vast, which we are called upon to dispose of. Some thousands or tens of thousands of busy pens are all the time engaged in swelling the vast collection. Some thousands of volumes are being added to it yearly by our English-speaking peoples. The other races of the civilized world are engaged in like task with equally commendable zeal. How shall we dispose of it? There are those who pro- pose to adopt the Caliph’s logic, modified to suit our Christian circumstances. Say they : “ These books are in conformity with the Bible, or they are not ; &c.” Now we are aware that this is a very easy way ; but it would not be popular with the poor novel-writers, nor even with the critics. Othello’s occupation would be gone, and so Othello must first be con- sulted. Nor would it satisfy those who are called to render a reason, whether to themselves or others, for the faith that is in them regarding this most remarkable phenomenon of the age. We must needs, therefore, cast about us for some other method.
Take them by Classes first. By what tests shall we decide whether any class of fictitious works has a right to exist ? By the three necessities — so we call them for distinctness’ sake. If there be something in the world for any class of the romance or novel to report, something not otherwise and better re- ported, then that class has a right to exist on the ground of the indispensable service it renders. This is the First neces- sity. Or, if it be indispensable as a preliminary — an alphabet, so to speak — with which men must begin before they can read any other and higher part of the reporting of God's world, then it claims a place as of worth fur its helpfulness in the world. This is the Second necessity. Or, if there be some
208 The Novel and Novel Beading. [April,
particular phase or phases of the world which cannot be otherwise as well reported to any particular class of minds, then its necessity for this end is a justification of its existence and proof so far of its genuine value. This is the Third necessity. By one or more of these necessities every form of fiction must justify its right to a place in the world. We think the Christian critic cannot demand less.
Beginning with the Romance proper, because the fancy in its development always precedes the imagination, its first subdivision, the Apologue , finds its justification in the second necessity, that of a preliminary to something higher. Histori- cally, we find it has been this; for when the troubadour and chivalric period, in which all was song, was past, men asked to be instructed, and their first lessons were furnished in fable. There was no system of science, or philosophy, or aesthetics, or morals yet wrought out, and therefore no correct or suffi- cient nomenclature in any of these departments. The machin- ery of the apologue supplied this from the analogies of the familiar, sensible world. The child is in a like position, and must be reached and elevated in the same way. Here in the childhood of the nation and of the individual we find the mission of this simplest form of fiction. From the day when Jotham uttered his fable from the top of Gerizim, and from the time when JEsop invented this form of literature to meet the rising demand of the Greek mind, and gave to the world its purest models in his fables, which have been translated into all modern languages, the apologue, in one or other of its forms, has been at once a chief instrument and evidence of awakening intellect. The marvellous “ Gesta Romanorum,” the exquisite “ Reiuecke der Fuchs” and, in the religious sphere, the matchless allegory of Bunyan, are but specimens, while they illustrate the part it has played in man’s history.
The Extravaganza , if it has a rightful place in literature, belongs to the period of struggle up from the lowest plane of knowledge to a higher. It precedes, yet is connected with, the clearing up and systematizing of the world. It is the attempt to report, not what is actually in the world, but what it seems, to the ignorant and untrained mind , may possibly be in it. To it belong the imaginary voyages, from “ Don Quixote ’’
1869.]
The Novel and Novel Beading.
209
to the “Arabian Nights’ Entertainments,” from “Gulliver’s Travels” to “ Sinbad the Sailor ” and “ Baron Munchausen and of the more ethereal kind, from Locke’s “ Moon Hoax ” to Poe’s “ Ilans Phaal and all those terrifico-ghostly, “blood and thunder ” books, of which Captain Marryatt’s are perhaps among the best, if best be possible where every thing is wholly and irretrievably bad. This form of romance cannot plead the first necessity, — can it plead the second or third ? We can conceive of such a plea, constructed somewhat as follows : The Extravaganza has its mission to awaken the young mind, or certain classes of minds, to the fact that there is a great and boundless workEabout us, to the further fact that there is a distinction between reality and fancy, and to the still more important fact that there is need of ascertaining some law or system by means of which the two may be distinguished. If it can substantiate such a claim, its right to exist must be admit- ted. If, however, any one is disposed to deny it this necessity, we do not care to argue the point with them ; for we think there is a safer method of bringing about the same waking up of intellect,— a method quite as easy, and having in its favor that it makes use of God’s grand facts instead of man’s disor- dered fancies.
The Sentimental Romance is justified — if at all — by the first necessity. It has the great and capital fact of love as between the sexes, as its basis ; but sentimentalism has divested it of all the higher interests of practical life. Love shorn of the realities of life degenerates straightway into a worthless senti- ment or a base passion. Here is the conceded sphere of the Minerva Press, the region of the “ yellow cover,” — “ Philip in search of a Wife,” and “ Kate in search of a Husband,” all the Mysteries, wLether of London, of Paris, or of Udolpho. We have not a word to say for this class, more read by the masses, perhaps, than all others. Its fundamental theme is infinitely better portrayed in the Novel proper, especially of Domestic Life, where it is not divorced from the realities of the world, the substantial verities of science and religion, and the creative power of the imagination. Let the torch of Ivaled be applied.
Turning now to test the classes of the Novel proper, we find
210 The Novel and Novel Reading. [Apkil,
that, as the Novel of Domestic Life , it pleads its right to exist, on the ground of what we have styled the first necessity , the necessity of something to report. There is necessity for it, in its Historico-descriptive form ; for national and historic phases of customs and character need to he portrayed, and in cases, where the portraiture is most needed, the facts of com mon life which furnished their original setting have been lost and must be supplied by the imagination. How could we dispense with Becker’s delineation of Greek and Roman life in “ Charicles ” and “ Gallus,” or with Scott’s portraitures of the Scottish past, and European mediaeval life, in such novels as “Old Mortality” and “Ivanhoe;” or how even with Cooper’s picturing of the life of the aborigines of our own continent and of the experiences of the Revolutionary period, in such novels as “ The Last of the Mohicans ” and the “ Spy”? There is like necessity for it, as the Novel of Home Life • for the every-day phases and developments of life in its better forms need to be reported for the benefit of the world, and yet in the most remarkable and telling instances the facts which are the setting in any individual case are ordinarily lost, or else too sacred for the public eye, or for other reasons require to be kept from it, so that new setting must needs be supplied by the imaginative faculty. Strip “ Kathrina ” — the only truly Christian poem this continent has produced — of its poetic garb and its art idea, and you have left the essence of a per- fect specimen of home life novel.
The Idea Novel can only justify its existence at the bar of a correct public sentiment by pleading the third necessity , that without it the masses cannot be reached with a certain class of truths. In the Didactic Novel the story of domestic life is made the instrument for mediating to the minds of the masses of men some political, social, moral, or religious truth or theo- ry. In its message it does not profess to present any tiling- new, for the matter of its report has been given already in the Scientific Treatise , or some other form of representative dis- course ; but it claims to present its theme better — not absolute ly, of course, but — relatively to the wants of the multitudes in- capable of mastering the profound dissertation or the learned essay. We are of those who would give the novelist the full-
I860.]
The Novel and Novel Reading.
211
est scope that can justly he accorded to him, but we confess to some misgivings just at this point. So long as it is his aim to portray domestic life as modified and shaped by grand truths, scientific, philosophic, artistic, ethical, or theological, we say, "Well, that is within the legitimate sphere of the novel. But when it comes to finding some new and easier way to truth, we are reminded of the sage’s, “ no royal road to geometry,” and cannot away with the gravest doubts. But we waive dis- cussion for the present.
The Artistic Novel, so called for the want of a better term at hand, does not make such high claims nor involve such grave issues, and we may therefore pass it with few words. In it the artistic form is made prominent. The old theme of love is used to give life to some art-conception or art theory which the writer seeks to embody in his production, perhaps for only the select few who can appreciate it. It makes claim only to the first necessity, that of something to report in the shape of a new art-creation. We have no ob- jection to offer. If Hawthorne chooses thus to give us a “ Marble Faun,” let him do it as freely as Coleridge gives us in poetic garb a “ Christabel,” fashioned *for like ends.
So much for the Classes of fiction. We leave them with their tests to the reader, satisfied if .what we have suggested shall lead him to make more thorough trial of this whole mat- ter for himself; and pass on to consider the tests of individual works of fiction. Any single novel may be thoroughly worth- less, though belonging to the very best class. How shall we judge of the character of each ? Suppose we have before us a selection of the works of Scott, Dickens, Bulwer, Thackeray , and Kingsley; “Jane Eyre,” “Adam Bede,” and “The Wide Wide World ;” “ Wilhelm Meister” and “ Les Misera- bles;” “The Schonberg-Cotta Family” and “ The Prince of the House of David ; ” with a family library of religious novels and a Sunday-school library thrown in, — by what rules are we to decide the value, essential or comparative, of any one of them all, or of all of them in order?
We answer, by the three Laws of Value, by one or other or all of which every thing must be tested : the Laws of the True, the Good, and the Beautiful. God himself has shaped every.
VOL. xli. — NO. II. 94
212 The Novel and Novel Reading. [April,
thing in the world according to these laws; and in so marked a way that, even as far back as Plato, the world was summed up in the True, the Good, and the Beautiful. He is man’s model. Whatever of man’s making does not conform to these three laws, is an error or a sin or a deformity, and has there- fore no right to exist in God’s world. Tins is too obvious to need a pause for argument.
The Law of the True requires a work of fiction to conform to fact — to reality — as God has been pleased to make it in the world.
Herein lies the secret of all substantial worth in whatever man makes. It were well if at the outset of every such inves- tigation as this we could be impressed with the immeasurable worth there is in Reality. The smallest fact is of infinitely greater moment and significance than the grandest fictitious event, if for no other reason than that the one is of God’s making and embodies something of his boundless wisdom and glory, while the other is only of man’s making and partakes of all his littleness and transitoriness. Fact and truth are of God’s making. Genius is not, as so many seem to imagine, the rival of God, buttiis seer, interpreter, and imitator. If it be able and willing to see , it will find infinite variety and meaning in the lessons divinely set for it to read ; and if it be able and willing to shape its portraiture of what it sees after God’s law of the true, it will thereby reach the farthest possi- ble for it in its art-creation up toward God. This seeing, fus- ing, shaping of God-made reality into new forms after the divine pattern, is the only creation by man, and in its higher phases is the prerogative of genius. The moment the under- standing which sees and the imagination which pictures are divorced in this work, the death of all genuine worth and power begins. Fact and truth are God’s. Man is therefore under perpetual obligation not to misrepresent them. “ Fic- tion, while the feigner of it knows he is feigning, partakes more than we suspect of the nature of lying" — so runs a quo- tation of Carlyle. To come right to the moral question; who shall dare say that the commandment, “ Thou shalt not bear false witness,” is not just as binding in the world of literature as in the world of ethics ? The jiovelist who has nothing of
18G9.] The Novel and Novel Reading. 218
fact or truth to report through his fiction lias no claim to be heard. This age admits that in all Art, “strength of realism is the surest pledge of strength in the exercise of the pure imagination,” and we therefore demand of him that he give us reality, reality, and again, reality. The sum of all is, that in God’s world not even the novelist lias a right to say or do a false thing.
The novelist must be true to nature, — so the critics are ac- customed to phrase it. They can mean nothing less than that he must first have a basis of fact aud truth, and then must conform the shapings of his imagination to the laws of the actual world. He is reporting the Domestic Life, in its pres- ent aspects or past phases, in its national or home develop ments, under the moulding power of manifold truths and in- fluences. He expresses sentiments, delineates characters, and portrays the world in which the characters move. The specific demands of the Law of the True upon the author of fiction and the violations of it by him, may be outlined in connection with these three things.
The novelist expresses sentiment. lie must give us love with true home sentiments and honest heart-feelings. This is violated in the puling sentimentality of the Minerva Press, with its everlasting and aimless love developments, with all the fundamental truth of home dropped ; with the aim of life and, in short, its whole basis of reality gone; and so, with every thing that could give it significance, worth, or nobility, lost. There is scarcely need for illustration here.
The novelist delineates character. lie must hold fast to the laws of man’s nature, social, intellectual, moral, and relig- ious, which shape character. Here come up the endless mon- strosities of the novels. Here are fashioned the social mon- strosities. It is a law of the universe that great forces work with quiet energy. It holds of men in society. The great artists, like Shakespeare, never forget it. It is the fool that is always prating, the clown that is always bustling in his show of activity. The poor novelist cannot get on with si- lence, nor without the action necessary to dramatic effect, nor can he depend upon the fools and clowns to do his talking and bustling. So he sets his characters moving in society as
214 The Hovel and Novel Reading. [Apuil,
no beings of 'such constitution could possibly move; making men who ought, from their nature, to be silent even to taci- turnity, gabble forever to help on the progress of the story ; making women, of the kind that ought to be quiet and unob- trusive, get themselves into all impossible positions so as to stir up all the world ; making both men and women, with nothing in them whether of genius or industry to warrant it, become heroes and accomplish marvels in the world, by force of impossible sets of circumstances. Even so notable a per- sonage as Charles Kingsley must be admitted a fashioner of such prodigies. Witness “ Alton Locke.” Here are produced the 'psychological monstrosities of the novels. Psychologically man is a complex being. Although Carlyle has been pleased to assert that Count Cagliostro differed from all other liars in being himself essentially , purely , wholly , a lie , we nevertheless venture to dissent from the underlying principle implied, and to affirm that character as we find it among men is never oth- erwise than complex. Macaulay, in his essay on Madame D’Arblay, has shown most admirably, that the pet idea of so many novelists, “ that every man has one ruling passion or trait, and that this clue, once known, unravels all the mysteries of his conduct,” finds no countenance in the works of that great- est of artists, Shakespeare. It finds none in the works of any great artist, whatever his sphere. The Bible, that best of all delineators of character, never makes the subjects of its sketches mere incarnations of single principles, or passions, or traits ; but it makes them men and women, and so forthwith familiar acquaintances. Even the three or four lines devoted incidentally to Lot’s wife, lay open her innermost soul in all its complexities to all men forever. The novelists have a mar- vellous knack of losing sight of this principle, and of giving their readers caricatures or figure-heads for real living beings ; of fashioning embodiments of some single trait of mind, or single passion, or single eccentricity in utterly extra-human de- velopment, instead of men and women. Dickens furnishes perhaps the best illustration of this sin against the Law of the True. lie is essentially a caricaturist. There is not a genuine character, after nature’s pattern, in all the pages of “ Nicholas Nickleby ” with its regiment of so-called men and
1869.]
The Novel and Novel Reading.
215
women. Here too originate the moral and, religious mon- strosities of the novels. In the sight of God man is a sinful and imperfect being. With his sinful proclivities and in so evil a world as this, the way to high attainments in virtue and piety is through struggles manifold and not seldom sore, and that oftenest with the little things of every-day life ; and the bravest and most successful come off’ from the conflict with some grave defects and not a few ugly scars. Yet the stock character in the sentimental religious novel of our family libraries is found in a being who never has a fault nor a taint of sin, and who is so perfect, in short, that there is no room for any thing positive in him whether of present action or of future growth, and who is therefore only fit to die and be translated from this so unfriendly world to some sphere more favorable to helplessness and inanity. The delineations, which have thus been hinted at as monstrosities, are but a few of the current forms of misrepresentation of all true development of man’s nature.
The novelist gives his readers portraitures of the world in which his characters move. It is God’s world, and as such he must not misinterpret it, in the Ruler, the law, the realm, or the sway exercised over it. The right conception of the divine character is at the foundation of any proper i*espect for it, the right view of the divine system comprised in the Law and Gospel is at the basis of all conscience and character in society, and the grasping of the true idea of God’s providence in the world is at the bottom of all calm courage in the battle of life ; the Law of the True, therefore, makes every departure from fact, in the delineation of any of these aspects, gross sin against humanity. The ordinary transgressions of the writers consist, in representing the Ruler of the world as a being alike incapable of equal justice and of positive love ; in unfolding the law — if at all — emasculated by being shorn of its sacred- ness, its terror, its killing power, its eternal penalty, so as to make the gospel a nullity; in ignoring — infidel-like — all provi- dence, or else abusing it by the introduction of impossible coincidences and miraculous interpositions at every turn and for the most trivial ends. For all such falsehood, the author of fiction is amenable both to God whom he would defame
216 The Novel and Novel Reading. [April,
and to man whom he would mislead and ruin. There is still a world which is God’s own and sacred in a peculiar sense, the world wherein are found the capital facts of Sacred His- tory, with whose preservation intact and intelligible are hound up the everlasting interests of the entire race of man. With unhesitating emphasis it is affirmed that they must not he tampered with, that there is no place for man’s fiction here. Here occurs the most daring violation of the Law of the True, in the works of that small class of novelists, who, casting aside the grand distinction which God has made between the sacred and the secular, the inspired and the uninspired, the divine and the human, at once falsify and imperil the sublime facts of the Holy Scriptures by mixing them up with their own silly imaginings and mawkish love sentiments. Renan’s “ Life of Jesus ” may be forgiven, for it is, on its face, a bold lie; but for Ingraham’s “ Prince of the House of David ” there is no tolerance possible ; for it is an unmitigated lie, concealing itself under the guise of God's grandest and most blessed truth. Only a novelist of the Minerva Press could have had so little real reverence for the Divine Being and his truth, and so little genuine regard for man, as to perpetrate it.
From this lengthy discussion, so lengthy because every thing hinges upon the Law of the True, we pass on to consider the second law of value, by which works of fiction are to he tested ; the Law of the Good.
The novelist is not to report all the facts of domestic life, but only noble fact, or that, which accords with the good in its aspects of the right, the pure, and the beneficent. We do not need to argue it at length, for we write for Christians, and every man of Christian instincts will admit it. Let it be con- sidered indisputable truth, that no man in God’s world, under God’s government, has any warrant for either advocating or doing a wrong, or a base, or an injurious thing.
What, then, of the transgressions of this law in the novel as it exists ? We note, first, the transgression by the use of only such facts as are petty and insignificant. The novelists forget that their existence is only justified by their having some- thing to report, and that the great world of grand and earnest things leaves no time to grovel among the low and worthless.
1869.]
The Novel and Novel Reading.
217
To be petty is to be base too. “ Pendennis ” of Thackeray is an illustration of the baseness of mere pettiness. The hero moves in so narrow a circle, is so utterly grovelling and inhu- man, that it is hard to conceive of an intelligent reader who could recognize in him any thing of common humanity ; and the facts — if it may be said to have a basis of facts — are so pitifully worthless, as to have no living interest to any being human or inhuman. If the book was produced by what the North British Review is pleased to call the “ photographic pro- cess ” of Mr. Thackeray, then the less we have of such process the better. If the novelist has nothing worth the while to report, let him for the sake of humanity hold his peace. Ilis utterances are a curse to the world in beino; worthless.
The second transgression is by the omission of all that is ■morally elevating and ennobling. W e are of those who demand of all Christian art that it lead up directly or indirectly toward our Father in heaven, — at least, that its tendency be upward. And for this reason ; there is enough in the world to drag men down toward the pit, and no one can have any warrant to add to it. A missionary asked Ram-Dass, a Hindoo man-god, who had lately set up for a god, “ What do you mean to do with the sins of mankind ? ” u I have fire enough in me to burn up all the sins in the world,” said Ram-Dass. It is the test of the true man with divine mission — that he have tire in him to burn up somewhat of the sins of the world and of its errors and woes. In this so great world, with its freight of immortals, with life only a dissolving vapor, the grave at our feet, and the judgment and eternity just before, with all these immortal destinies depending upon the moment which the dissolving vapor takes to disappear, if there be not some gospel-tidings in his soul burning for utterance, let the man altogether hold his peace. Even Scott, conceded so generally honest in his adherence to the truth of nature, where religious prejudice is not involved, has not escaped the accusation of having no message in this highest sense, or at best but little of this sacred fire from the divinity. In the evident haste of his later works, and the want of the noblest aim, there is proof positive that they were done for pay, for which alone no one ever yet did truly good work, and not from the inward fire impelling
21S
The Novel and Novel Heading.
[April,
him to correct the error, and purge the sin, and alleviate the sorrows of men. The pretentious art novels, like “ The Mar- ble Faun,” fall under the same censure, many of them. There might be written on this one of Hawthorne's, “ God is not in all its thoughts ; its characters are not realities, but conven- tionals, phantoms ; beauty here usurps the place of all the higher moral forces, and sits upon the throne of God, and in so doing ceases to be beautiful.” The novel that omits all noblest fact, cannot itself be in the highest sense true to the Law of the Good, even though in its chosen sphere, it conform pertectly to the Law of the True. The only true nature in man is Christian nature.
The highest offence on the part of the novelist against the Law of the Good, is by the introduction of a positively vicious element. And let it be noted here, that this is not a question of the necessity of introducing moral evil into the novel ; for that, be it freely admitted, is the dark background by contrast with which the richest glow of moral beauty is brought out. In the world of the novel, as in the real world, evil to be resisted, endured, remedied, or vanquished, affords the only field in which the characters can exert their moral and intel- lectual force. Mighty men are brought to light and devel- oped by tasking their human powers to the utmost in the con- test with evil. It is essential to fiction. It is not a question of the fact of introducing evil, but of the method and the end. The same character by one artist and in one setting, may be wholly base ; by another and in different place, a means to some exalted good. To illustrate. Ostensibly the same being figures in “ Paradise Lost,” in “ Faust,” in “ Cain,” in “A Dra- ma of Exile,” and in the Bible. The Miltonic Satan has ex- alted virtues which attract, but he has vices which repel more, so that only the proud and scornful man of ambition, who “would rather reign in hell than serve in heaven,” would be drawn to him ; the Mephistopheles of Goethe appeals to all the baser instincts, so that every basest man longs to be just such a devil ; the Byronic Lucifer attracts more than the Byronic God, so that he who accepts the poet’s delineation must, in his worship, put him in the place of God ; the Lucifer of Mrs. Browning is one,
I860.] The Novel and Novel Reading. 219
' “ To whom the highest and the lowest alike
Say. 1 Go from us — we have no need of thee ”
the Satan of the Bible is a terror to every human being, whether base or otherwise. The character by the man of moderate Christian instincts, if not drawn in truest lines, would yet lead the generality of men upward; the portraitures by the infidel and the God-hater are only and intensely evil, and can but hurry men downward ; that by the woman, who represents Christianity in its more earnest form, is, in its power to repel men from evil, second only to that by the divine pen, which is made one of the mightest motives to urge the lost heaven- ward. It is the mode or the end and not the fact of the pres- entation of evil, that is chiefly objectionable. Wherever the novelist presents the evil for its own sake, or so indorses and advocates it as to draw men down with it, there it becomes wholly debasing, and he loses his right to an audience with the world.
But let there be no misunderstanding on this point ; for not all evil is to be delineated by the novelist. We have our grave doubts as to whether the portraiture of vulgar life , in which so many of the novels abound, can be justified. The vulgarity which is tainted by pretension and affectation in the so called higher classes, and by slang in the lower; “the vul- garity that produces snappish wives, coarse husbands, and rude children ; that shows itself in the envy and the ill-temper, the vauity and the affectation, which good-breeding corrects or at least conceals,” — only disgusts and. when disgust is over, debases by actual contact in real life, and can do no better for us in the novel. Some one has attributed the success of Dickens to three things : genius, child’s play, and dishonor. Acknowledging the first, and recognizing everywhere in all his works the presence of the second, we are yet inclined to the opinion that he owes most to the tliird. His highest ideal is the kind-hearted man , and he secures his passing current, as in the case of Pickwick and the Brothers Cheeryble, by making him both foolish and profane, and surrounding him with a crowd of scoundrels whose touch is pollution. The slip-slop which he puts in the moutli of Sam Weller and the gibberish in which Jingle gabbles, the oaths and vile slang with which
220
[April,
The Novel and Novel Reading.
every thing is interlarded, and the perpetual caricature of all that is best and glorification of all that is basest, can only exert an evil influence. We protest against them. The evil does not need their help in making its way in the world. But what- ever may be said of simple vulgarity, it is certain that the deep probing of the moral ulcers of society , which is so common with the novelists, can be only harmful and that to the last degree. Besides that class of pamphlets issued in the interests of vice and sold everywhere by the ton in defiance of law, there is a more pretentious class of works, of which the French school is the representative, whose aim it is to array deadly vices in gilded vesture and to paint the worst crimes in gor- geous colors to captivate the uninitiated. They have no bet- ter right in the world than have the vices and crimes which they portray and gild. And let not this protest against them be thought a matter of light import ; for here is one of the departments of the great school of vice and crime for our modern civilization. The philosophy of the evil results of their teachings may be made plain in few words. Let it be once understood that it is not simply true that men are always more susceptible to evil influences than to good, not simply true that they are always more easily dragged down than lifted up, but that it is further true, that they always gravitate hell ward of themselves with infinite momentum ; and then the enormous sin against humanity of all such deline- ations will begin to be appreciated. Multitudes find the highest entertainment in portrayal, in naked form and for its own sake, of the basest activity. Men of comparative purity read Balzac and Eugene Sue and are surprised to learn what marvellous attractions are to be found in a life of sentimental beastliness. Familiarity with vice lessens its repulsiveness to all. Human nature shattered and defiled as it is, cannot gaze upon such scenes without peril of more complete wreck and deeper defilement.
Let the protest against the portraiture, by the writers of fiction, of that which in its essential nature is of the devil, be emphasized as strongly as possible. The divine Law ot the Good, in connection with the sinful tendencies of our fallen human nature, renders it imperative that baseness in its lowest
1869.]
The Novel and Novel Reading.
221
forms should not only never be delineated for its own sake, but that it should not even be delineated for the sake of attaining higher moral ends, if those ends can otherwise be attained.
The third law of value, by which works of fiction are to be tested, is the Law of the Beautiful. The novelist in delinea- ting noble fact has no right to perpetrate a deformity — a monstrosity — in Art. Although this law has to do with the whole matter of form and is therefore most important from the art side, we place it last in our discussion as of least impor- tance in its moral bearings.
In the novel, as in all art, there is the element of reality as the basis, and the human element added by the artist. The fact and truth are God’s, the form into which they are thrown, in- cluding the drapery of fiction with which they are invested, belongs to the novelist ; the former must accord with the Laws of the True and the Good, the latter must conform to the Law of the Beautiful. The divine fashioner of all things made every thing beautiful in its season ; he who aspires to imitate him must obey his law.
What are the requirements made of the novelist by the Law of the Beautiful ? It would take a volume to present the subject clearly and fully ; only the merest sketch can be given in the page here assigned to it. But, to the sketch. The novel here appears as a work of Art. Unity must be de- manded in it. The novel, in its highest form, must be one, not as a heap of bricks is one, but as a tree is one. Its unity, to be of the highest type, must be organic, in other words. Shakespeare in the plays of inferior power, as the Twelfth Night, Midsummer Night’s Dream, As You Like It, produces the total effect “ by a co-ordination of the characters as in a wreath of flowers but in the plays of superior power, as in Lear, Hamlet, and Othello, “by the subordination of all to one, either as the prominent person, or the principal object.” So in the novel, there must be superadded to the keen insight which pierces to the core of every fact, and the comprehensive grasp which seizes upon just those facts required, that imagina- tive power which moulds and fuses them into one art-product, in which all the parts shall take their places round one centre,
222 The Novel and Novel Reading. [Apkil,
and all together, even to the least, conduce the utmost pos- sible to the one end in view. So Progress is demanded in the novel as a work of art. The test question is, Does the novel progress and evolve, or only spin upon itself? There are two modes which the novelists have of fashion- ing character,— from the skin inward, never reaching the heart, and from the heart outward ; two modes of present- ing truth,— in the fragments gathered, and in the germ unfolded. The latter method is, in each case, the preroga- tive of genius, and renders true progress possible. Begin- ning with the germinal idea or the central character as the point of departure, it is comparatively an easy task to make all other ideas and characters unfoldings or limitations of this, and to take into account, in the development of the plot, the world in which, and the divinely constituted laws of character and society under which, it must be carried out, and thus to secure a constant advance to the end. And from the art side, Completeness , with all that is involved in it, must he demand- ed of the novel. In short, under the Law of the Beautiful, the novelist must, in his work, conform to all those principles of art so felicitously set forth and so aptly illustrated by Rus- kin in the chapters on “ Invention,” in the fifth volume of “Modern Painters.” Me agree with Henry Rogers when he says, “Ho fiction is, intellectually, worth anybody’s reading, that has not considerable merit as a work of art.”
Ho Christian critic can stop short of the most xdgid applica- tion of these tests to every work of fiction that demands of him a reading. It is worthless and harmful just so far as it fails to stand the test of the three laws of value. Every viola- tion of the True in a novel fits it to perplex and embaiTass or mislead man in the thinking and work of life ; every depar- ture from the Good, prepares it to demoralize men and lower the tone of society ; every turning from the Beautiful, neces- sitates that it blind the eyes of men to the glory of God’s works. The least that caxi he required is that these shall he excluded from his works, or the novelist denied a hearing.
Me come to Novel Reading. Mhat shall be said of it? Our Puritan fathers pronounced it a sin, and to judge from some of the indications would have x’anked it next to exitei'ing
223
I860.] The Novel and Novel Reading.
into leagua witli the arch-fiend. And when we open one of the novels in vogue a hundred years and more ago, — say “ Tom Jones,” by Fielding, — we confess that it would not have seemed very strange if the opposition of those altogether ear- nest and practical men to novel reading had furnished a fourth and later tragedy for Mr. Longfellow to embellish. Fielding, Sterne, Smollett — who of this day would trust bis children with them ? A revolution has occurred in the novel since then. It is now almost a century since Miss Burney showed that even London life might be delineated in all its heights and depths without offence against morality or delicacy, as the worldling understands those qualities. Miss Edgeworth, at the opening of the present century, followed in the same di- rection, though still coming as far short as possible of the rec- ognition of God in the world. Since then some of the novels, to say the least, have been dedicated to the advancement of truth and purity in the wTorld. So the question touching nov- el reading: has changed somewhat.
If it be true that in Literature all the world must be report- ed for man to read, then it follows that all the report is to he read by the complete man. If the novel be a part of this re- porting of the world, it must be proper and even necessary to read the novel, provided always that it be of the right stamp and be read in due proportion. But what shall decide that proportion ? Evidently the relative importance of the place it properly occupies in the work of reporting the world in its totality. Now the sphere of the novel is but a small province of the great world, it ought not therefore to occupy a large place in our reading. It cannot take the place of the pro- ductions of Oratory, judicial, forensic, and sacred, in which the giant intellects have grappled with the great practical prob- lems which have to do with public justice and well being and with man’s everlasting destiny. It cannot take the place of Poetry, in which the grandest imaginations have embodied man’s highest conceptions of the beautiful in object, in inci- dent, in action, and in feeling in alP ages. It cannot take the place of the broad range of Scientific Treatises, in which the close observers and clear thinkers have embodied all our cer- tain knowledge of the laws of the world as well as of the prin-
224
The Novel and Novel Heading. [April,
eiples of art and morals. It cannot take the place^of Biogra- phy and History, in which the accurate chroniclers and pro- found philosophizers have gathered up and interpreted the facts and from them reconstructed the great events of life in- dividual and national. So through the whole range of litera- ture,— nothing else will for a moment concede its place to the novel. Its share in our reading, even allowing a lar^e mar- gin for recreation, must still be a humble one.
The so-evident tendency of the day to put the Didactic Kov- el in the place of the many more substantial forms of repre- sentative discourse has already been adverted to. What is to be said of it? In his essay on Charles Kingsley, Mr. Bayne discourses as follows: ‘‘We put it calmly to Mr. Kingsley, whether the momentous interests he desires to serve are best promoted by a series of fictions ? It is a new thing surely to reconstruct society on a foundation of brilliant and fashionable novels. Really if this example prevails, discussion will be- come, in the happy ages of our children, a different thing from what it has been hitherto. Its liveliness will be indescribable. Only conceive the change that will come about in the matter of citations. Ko longer will one groan over such references as these: — Thom. Aq. Summ. Theol. (lib. x., cap. xi., sec. xii.); Duns. Scot, de Sent. Lombard, (prop, iii., sec: iv.); Grot, de Jure Belli et Pacis (vol. i., lib. ii., cap. iii.). We shall be charmed by such authorities as these : — “ The Chris- tian Religion and the Rights of Man ” (see exhort, at bedside of Alt. Locke, by Elean. Lyne, stan. nov., vol. xi. Kings.); “The Fundamental Distinction between Religion and Philos- ophy ” (see speech declar. of Ed. Clifford to Angel. Goldfinch, Bent, ser., vol. xix.). There is a good time coining, boys and girls, sure enough ! But joking apart, we seriously think novels are not the best vehicle for such important proposals as Mr. Kingsley's.” The picture is to the life. Let us look for a moment at what does not fall within the scope of Mr. Bayne, — the fundamental arguments against all such proposals. Their first and chief claim to attention is. Truth made easy / which, in the sense intended, is an impossibility. A man may steal his gold at the stock-board, and thus by deliberately defying that day of retribution when the stock-board decisions will be
1869.] The Novel and Novel Reading. 225
rectified, secure wealth without effort ; but there is no such short route to knowledge. The damaging effect, on the whole being, of trying the easy method, will come up for considera- tion later in this discussion. We affirm that the novel is essen- tially unfit to be made an instrument of instruction. It can be trusted to do nothing higher than to portray domestic life as it is shaped under the influence of great truths. The more absorbing nature of less important and merely objective mat- ter, the passion, the hurry of dramatic movement, all unfit the reader, who gives himself up to its sway, for clear seeing. We venture to affirm also that the novelist is constitutionally unfit to be a teacher of scientific truth in any department. The born naturalist cannot appreciate metaphysics ; the born meta- physician is almost certain to undervalue the truth of the ex- act sciences ; the born novelist appreciates neither, but is es- sentially an idealizer. lie cannot be trusted. He is made to “ draw upon his imagination for his facts.” It is his confirmed habit so to do. On the whole, the conclusion cannot be avoid- ed, that only evil can result from the attempt to put the novel- ist with his productions in the seat of the other and authorized teachers of the world. The novel is to be read only in the proper proportion, as decided by its place in literature. If the reader wishes a practical rule for his guidance, he may al- ways be certain that his novel reading has been in excess when he turns away to poetry or history or any other form of solid reading to find it tame and uninteresting.
But in defiance of theories, vast numbers are in these days given to inordinate novel reading. What is the necessary ejfiect of this on the whole being of man ? A helpful illustration may be drawn from the law of man’s bodily constitution. Chiefly three classes of substances enter into the work of building up and keeping up the human system; the carbo- nates, the nitrates, and the phosphates : the first of which are the heaters ; the second, the muscle-strengtheners, the third, the brain-builders. With one of these withheld, the body chills, or loses its muscular power, or ceases to be worth any thing to the thinking soul that inhabits the brain. With only one administered, e. g., the carbonates, in sugar plums, the whole being burns out and becomes powerless and worthless.
226 The Novel and Novel Reading. [April,
Novels, which may with propriety be called the carbonates — the heaters — of literature, have an analogous effect on man’s soul, when administered in over dose and alone, — they leave it, so to speak, burnt out, powerless, every way worthless.
That this is the effect of the over-dose of even the "ood
C5
novel, is demonstrable. It must weaken the intellect. It actually does it. So far as the novel is truth at all, it is, as has been said, truth made easy. We think it is Coleridge who likens the intellectual effort of the novel reader to the dreamy swinging of a child on a gate. People resort to works of fiction because they are easy reading. Change this character- istic and they would remain unread. Just in proportion to their sterling worth they are left unread. It is this ease of reading that makes them the admirable means of recreation they are to men of hard- worked brains. We have heard of a somewhat distinguished revivalist (do not vouch for the genu- ineness of his cases of conversion), who endured the powerful draught of his daily efforts by spending all his leisure time in reading novels. But this easy reading makes too much famili- arity with this class of literature destructive to mental power ; for it is a law of God, more unalterable than the laws of the Medes and Persians, and illustrated in all human experience, that truth is only mastered and intellect only strengthened by powerful exertion. Dreaming and castle-building may be more grateful to mankind than solid intellectual effort, but intellectual growth can only be by the latter. The devourer of novels sooner or later loses power to grapple with the great truths that underlie the realities of life, and becomes a weak- ling, if not a driveller, in the world.
Immoderate reading of even the best novels deadens true feeling. What ! our friend of much novel reading will ex- claim, does not the very mission of the novelist lie chiefly in the direction of the development of feeling ? Does not the master novelist touch every spring of emotion, now calling forth the tenderest and most acute human sympathy with bodily pain, and again waking responsive echoes from the profoundest depths of the spiritual being? How can his work fail to cultivate and deepen every noble and generous emotion of the soul? Yet the fact is, it takes out all the virtue of such
1369.] The Novel and Novel Reading. 227
emotions. The secret of this effect we find in the difference between the emotion evoked by fiction and fact. Bayne, in his essay on the modern novel, has drawn the distinction clearly.
“ The difference between the distress occasioned by literal fact, and that evoked by the tragic artist, may be clearly perceived by a glance at the murder of Nancy in “ Oliver Twist.” Let one, after perusing the description given by Dickens, reflect for a moment on the possibility that such an incident may have occurred in actual life. He instantly experiences a thrill of regret and dismay. But it is very different from that felt while he listened to Mr. Dickens. A new condition affects the case. The sorrow is anchored in the heart by fact. To weep, it is true, gives relief: weeping, as distinguished from not weeping, sorrow relieved as distinguished from sorrow unrelieved, is pleasurable : but the knowledge that such girls have actually been killed can be washed out by no tears ; it remains there, demanding a fresh flow, nay, demanding, to relieve the grating pain, that active effort be engaged in, to put such catastrophes beyond the limits of possibility. Imagination in the one case lulls reason asleep, and produces an emotion powerful while it lasts; when reason awakens, the man declares he has forgotten himself, and the cause and the emotion pass from the mind together.”* This presentation is undeniable in its truth and unanswerable in its argument.
The tendency of excessive novel-reading is to destroy real benevolence. Bishop Butler has laid bare these two curious facts in man’s moral anatomy, — “ That, from our very faculty of habits , passive impressions, by being repeated , grow weaker, and that practical habits are formed and strengthened by repeated acts.” Ilenry Bogers, in his incomparable letters to his niece on novel reading, f has applied them with peculiar power in elucidating this subject. “ Who can be more tender- hearted, perhaps you will say, than heroes and heroines in novels, or more ready to cry than an inveterate novel-reader ? Nevertheless be pleased to remember that however prompt the
* Essays in Biography and Criticism. By Peter Bayne, M. A. First Series. Boston: Gould & Lincoln. See essay on “ The Modern Hovel,” page 376.
f The Greyson Letters. By Henry Rogers. Boston: Gould & Lincoln. Seepages 176-7.
VOL. XLI. XO. II.
95
22S The Novel and Novel Reading. [ArRir.,
fancy may be to depict distress, or the eye to attest the genuineness of the emotion that distress has awakened, they indicate what may be merely passive states of mind ; and no benevolence is worth a farthing that does not proceed to action. How, the frequent repetition of that species of emotion which fiction stimulates tends to prevent benevolence, because it is out of proportion to corresponding action ; it is like that frequent ‘going over the theory of virtue in our own thoughts,’ which, as Butler says, so far from being auxiliary to it, may be obstructive of it. As long as the balance is maintained between the stimulus given to imagination with the consequent emotions , on the one hand, and our practical habits , which those emotions are chiefly designed to form and strengthen, on the other, so long the stimulus of the imagination will not
stand in the way of benevolence, but aid it But if the
luxury — and it is a luxury, and in itself nothing more — of sympathy and mere benevolent feeling be separated from action, then Butler’s paradox becomes a terrible truth, and ‘ the heart is not made better,’ but worse, by it.”
Inordinate reading of novels destroys all taste for the other and more solid reading which is an essential for every intelli- gent man or woman, and so, in the end, all taste for real, right life. This is a grave charge, but nevertheless one the general admission of which saves the necessity of any long pause to substantiate it. The result is the saddest part of all. The unhealth}' excitement of the novel, in which more startling events are often recorded in a single chapter than ever actu- ally occur in a life-time, has a fascination connected with it, which, to the confirmed novel-reader, makes every thing else appear tame and void of interest, and brings about a bondage as complete as that of the inebriate to his cups. He will barter every thing for a story, however base it may be. The unhappy victim of this fascination soon finds himself in this dull world of reality with none of the knowledge needful for true earnest, noble living. In such circumstances the acquired inclination leads him to seek, by the planning of unheard-of adventures, the introduction of new excitements, the invention of novel amusements, to transform life into the same passionate round, the same wild hurly-burly, that he
1869.]
The Novel and Novel Reading.
229
finds delineated in his favorite authors. "Worthlessness, vice, crime have here a new and most prolific source opened.
If the tendency of reading even the best novels to excess be thus to sap the very foundations of character and strength, vastly worse must be the effect of such immoderate reading when it is also indiscriminate. For the vast majority of the works of fiction are not good, — will not stand the test of the laws of value, that have been laid down, even when applied with the largest charity. The reader is led by them away from the facts of history and the truths of science, away from the laws of ethics and the doctrines of religion, away from the realities of this life and the transcendent glories of the life to come. The precious time for solid mental improvement is wasted, and he is made to move in a fictitious world, until all his notions of society are warped, all his views of life per- verted, all his ideas of religion distorted, in short, until he becomes equally unfit to stay in the world of reality or to go out of it.
In conclusion, we are brought face to face with one of the most momentous social questions of the times : — Whither is this novel-seeking , novel-reading age tending f The scope of our discussion has furnished us with the principles needed to frame an intelligent answer, when once the requisite facts are fully before us.
One of these facts is, that the novelist is the accepted teacher of this age, the accredited fashioner and moulder of the sentiment and life of the age. The novel is the one great text-book of the times, not excepting the spelling-book, nor even the Bible. “Pecksniffian,” “ Pickwickian,” not “Mosaic,” “Pauline,” is the order of the day.
By observation, we find the novelist actually occupying the place of initiator of the young into the mysteries of life tem- poral and eternal. From the worldly side, his productions find their way into the hands of the children, by the scores and hundreds of journals and magazines and circulating libraries, of which fiction is at once the warp and the woof ; by the multitudinous village and country weeklies, in which the “story” is the only recommendation to the younger members of the households in our broad agricultural communities]
230
[April,
The Kovel and Kovel Heading.
by the books of startling adventure by sea and land, so often artfully linked with our national struggles and destiny, and belonging to the extravaganzas. From the religious side they reach the chief place in the hearts of the children, by means of the religious journals and magazines, of which only the few- est seem to be able to exist long without being driven to intro- duce the novel to keep up the subscription list ; and, more than all, by the aid of the Sabbatli-school library, of which the only portion ordinarily read — as any one may learn by exami- nation— is the fictitious. Without bestowing a moment’s atten- tion to assorting the tons of fiction that reach the children from the side of the world, it may be branded in the mass as base. But what are the facts touching the character of that which reaches them from the religious side ? Take the Sabbath- school novel by itself. Weighed in the balance it is found wanting. We do not, let it be understood, refer at all to the books that sometimes find their way into such libraries; for we have known even Captain Marryatt’s works to secure a place on the shelves in the most popular church of the land, and have heard that Ike Marvel’s “Dream Life” with the chapter on “ Boy Religion ” left out, has been made an effective Sunday- school book in certain quarters ; but the reference is to a very large portion of the Sabbath-school novels that are duly ac- credited religious by “ Boards ” and “ Committees ” and Chris- tian publishers, and indorsed by editors and teachers. Test most of them by the Law of the True. The basis of reality is not there. Their authors are largely such as cannot read one of God’s lessons of fact or truth aright. Very many of them — for we make honorable exception of some — cannot run over a page of nature accurately ; do not know man in the hidden springs of his life ; could not write even a respectable essay on any important topic ; are as incapable of comprehend- ing any religious truth with which they deal, in its essence and bearings, as the fly of the fable was of understanding the nature of the elephant on whose tusk he buzzed. Yet such writers, whose ignorance is only surpassed by their weakness and vanity, and the larger number of whom intelligent parents would not trust to teach their children arithmetic, essay to furnish our children with their religious aliment, aud we permit it and
I860.]
The Novel and Novel Reading.
231
thank them for it! They tell in most affecting strains of the good little children who die early. They narrate in more stir- ring style the adventures of little children not so good, who, like the kero of “ Tip Lewis,” attain to wondrous heights of sanctity and success by ways and means no more adapted to take them thither than a steam-balloon would be to take one on a voyage to the sun. They cannot depict any thing without distorting it, for they have never seen any thing and cannot see any thing. Test them by tbe Law of tbe Good. Virtue in these novels is mere faultlessness. If tbe evil is shown up, in some boy who begins with stealing a pin and ends with murder and the gallows, be is made a hero to tbe child-reader nevertheless, for the poor author cannot make shift to get his hook read or to sell his wares without gilding the evil. But the one offence above all others is in the incomplete views given of the Law and the Gospel. The Law in its integrity enters but little into the Sabbath-school fiction of the day, and its Gospel therefore is not God’s Gospel, but the Gospel of sentimental- ism. Here it is that the very foundation of religious princi- ple, of Christian conscience and character, are being removed, and wide-reaching ruin is being prepared. We believe few have any conception of the fearful evils involved in such relig- ious nourishment, as is furnished for the children of the Church in the miserable spawn of many of well-meaning, hut altogether mistaken literati. Test them by the Law of the Beautiful. They claim to be works of imagination, but some one has justly said, that it would take the most exalted flight of the imagination to imagine any such thing as imagi- nation in most of them. They are found wanting — everyway wanting. And this, be it understood, in addition to the fact of the inordinate and almost exclusive attention given them by the young, and which has already been shown to be ruinous even where the novels are of the best quality. Evidently the weak novelist is the allowed if not accredited initiator of the young into the mysteries of man’s twofold life.
What the weak novelist begins in the children, the godless novelist carries out and completes when they have grown to maturity. Except just a few who write under the control of Christian principles, and the remainder of the host who are the
232 The Novel and Novel Reading. [April,
fashioners of sentiment, character, and life, can scarcely be classed as high as Miss Edgeworth, whom Robert Hall is re- ported to have called the most irreligious (using the word in the etymological sense) writer he ever read. The Dime Novel in all its forms; the Venus Novel, as found in the yellow cover, in the newspapers and cheap magazines, and in the pamphlets which hide from the gaze of the virtuous — what reader of these ever thought of godliness in the same breath with them! Even upon the works of the more exalted teachers of this generation — of Thackeray, Bulwer, Dickens, Charles Reade, Charlotte Bronte, Miss Evans, and scores of others — must he written, “ Without God in the world.” Some of them > like Hawthorne, may never have had deptli enough of religious nature to lead them to raise and discuss the great questions which have to do with God and the soul’s destiny ; others, like Miss Evans, may have made deepest inquisition and may have grappled with awful unseen realities in a death-struggle; but they are all alike without God, and the majority of them haters of God. These are they who are leading men away from all solid truth, and especially from God’s truth after their fiction. These are they to whom the young man or young woman of the so-called higher circles resorts for the scanty stock of knowledge of men and things with which to enter upon the duties of active life ; the wife and mother of the same circle, for inspiration in the accomplishment of her divinely-appoint- ed tasks of home-cheering and child-training ; the merchant? in his hours of retirement, for the ethics which are to guide his business activities; the congregations, for the literary standard by which they are to judge the ministers and their sermons. These are they after whose models the sentiment, taste, charac- ter, and life of the age, are being fashioned. From the cradle to the grave the 'novelists, weak or wicked, are having it pretty much their own way.
The other facts which it is requisite to have fully before us in order to answer the practical questions above propounded, are found in the actual state of things at the present time, after this supremacy of the novelist has continued for a score of years, more or less. Already in society every thing is thrown out of the old track of truth, sobriety, justice, and propriety.
1809.]
The Novel and Novel Reading.
233
Amusement is one of the grand ends of life. Business has largely become mad speculation, and to a fearful extent is un- der the control of downright gamblers. Government in all its departments has become utterly corrupt — rulers, legislators, and judges being alike shamelessly bought and sold. Society on a wide scale has become a horrid scene of robbery and bloodshed. Rising from human law to the divine law, we find it through the whole range of the commandments, every- where set at defiance. Take the first commandment. Men set gold and power before the one God. Take the second. Men devote themselves to any thing rather than the worship and service of God, — in God's house to fashion, show, a book, a gown, an altar, a crucifix. Take the third. One cannot pass along the streets without being shocked with utterances of profanity from the very boys. Take th q fourth. The Sab- bath, to a large portion of the community, is the same as any other day, except that it is a day of amusement. We have seen Sabbath steamboat excursions, with music, dancing, and firing of cannon, start from before the very doors of the church during the Sabbath morning service, and Sabbath ex- cursions and displays are everywhere becoming familiar in our cities. Take the fifth. The family — where is its authority and sacredness, when in enlightened Hew England even the laws permit one divorce for every nine marriages? Take the sixth. In some regions murders are of daily occurrence and almost by the score. In four hundred and forty cases recorded in a single year, one-half the murderers were apprehended, one- fourth brought to trial, twenty, or one in every twenty-two, convicted! Take th & seventh. The advertisement of the ten- thousand quack nostrums in the newspapers might wrell startle any one with its tale of constant and high-handed transgres- sion ! Take the eighth. How few feel secure against burg- lars even with their doors locked and window's barred. How much is it transgressed in business and speculation. Take the ninth. The slander, bribery, maclduation, deception, and corruption everywhere rife and everywhere tolerated, show how society at large regard it. Take the tenth. The code of business morals that rules is an unblushing violation of it. The conscience essential to Christian society seems somehow to
234 The Novel and Novel Reading. [April,
be gone. In the holy places, sncli as the old giants of theolo- gy used to occupy, stand men scarcely credited with piety to go through with poor theatricals and create a sensation on the Sabbaths. With multitudes the old-fashioned gospel has lost credit. At home more than half of the people are out of the churches and to all intents and purposes heathen, and abroad the exigencies of the world vainly call for a tenfold increase in the forces of evangelization, while with the “ Boards” which have in charge the benevolent contributions of the churches the outcry raised in consequence of threatening bankruptcy has become chronic. And all this with scarcely a reactionary tendency of the slightest moment anywhere perceptible ; rather, with the awful downward tide hourly increasing in velocity and momentum !
With such a state of things, and with the novelist in the seat of power, the question, “ Whither are we tending ?n be- comes easy of answer in the light of the principles evolved in the course of this discussion. Whither is the ship tending when a mad pilot at the helm has already taken her around and down half the spirals of the maelstrom? Whither, if not to wreck in the bottom of the great vortex ? So every thing indicates that the great ship on which we ride the stormy waters must be hurled to inevitable ruin, unless the pilot be forthwith exchanged for a truer, better, and stronger, and the helm be put hard down, and the ship sweep back on her course. Shall this generation witness the change of helmsman, the reversal of the course, the salvation from God ? Or shall it wait to learn its folly when the ruin has come? With a Pen- tecostal effusion of the Holy Spirit, which shall lead those in the high places of the Church to a firmer and more intelligent grasp of these grand moral and religious issues, and which shall beget an energy, fearless and irresistible, for the truth, we may hope for the best. Without it — but we dare not fol- low the thought !
1869.]
Commercial Speculation.
235
Art. V. — Ethics and Economics of Commercial Speculation.
We use the term Commercial Speculation, not because what we propose to examine is always confined to commerce in the strict and technical sense of exchange of merchandise, but be- cause it pertains to the exchange of property of some sort. We are thus able to distinguish it from speculation in the sense of speculative thinking. With speculation in the latter sense we do not now concern ourselves. We ask the attention of our readers to some thoughts on commercial speculation in its abstract nature, its present concrete forms and workings in the country, and especially to its moral characteristics and economic results.
Of its vast prevalence, its enormous proportions, and dis- astrous effects upon the moral, and even material, interests of our country, most have some, only the fewest any adequate, conception. It has been a serious evil in our great monetary centres ever since they have become strong enough to have regular sales of stocks and bonds, and has grown with the immense increase in the market of this class of securities. While the latter have increased a hundredfold, the spirit, power, and venom of speculation have increased a thousand- fold. At various times the fever has become epidemic in re- gard to other species of property. Lands in and adjacent to villages and cities, present and prospective, real or ideal, on the earth or on paper, have always been a favorite field for speculation. In 1837 the mania for speculation in town and city lots, generally existing only on paper, raged to such an extent as to precipitate a terrific financial panic, which for extent, severity, and persistence, has not since been equalled. In the great centres of commerce, the universal question was not so much, who has failed, as who remains solvent? The country was strewn with the wrecks of fallen fortunes. The busiest tribunals were courts of bankruptcy. It was five years before the business of the country was started and re- organized upoil a sound and healthy basis. Various causes are now turning one great current of speculation in this direc- tion, with ominous foretokenings of a similar revulsion.
23 G
Ethics and Economics
[April,
In 1857, another appalling financial crisis was experienced. This arose mainly from extravagant railway speculations and credits — the immense expansion of unremunerative and pre- mature railway projects, temporarily sustained by the pro- ceeds of worthless securities, which swamped the market, being floated for a time, at heavy discounts, by interest pay- ments in money itself borrowed, until this, in turn, from being a buoy to uphold, became a drag to sink them. Credit was swollen by credit, and loans by loans, until inflated to a vast bubble, or series of bubbles, which burst on the failure of a single banking institution, and precipitated a financial panic, with a wide-spread ruin of speculative, involving necessarily some solid, fortunes. But from this the country quickly re- covered. In its immediate origin and effects it was in the nar- row channel of railroad securities and their ramifications, and limited likewise in duration. But for the time, in Aew York and the great commercial centres, the very air was, as Dr. Potts said, “thick with the dust of fallen fortunes.” Speculation in the chimerical enterprises and securities of fictitious value, to which we have referred, carried to the extent of virtual and wide-spread gambling, greatly contributed to urge on the ca- tastrophe.
But the spirit of speculation received an impulse and scope from our late civil war, and its consequences, which it still retains, and which outruns all former example. This has in- augurated the third great speculative era in this country within the life of a generation. Owing to peculiar circum- stances it has not as yet culminated and exploded in a finan- cial catastrophe. Being thus enduring and pervading, it shows more of the obstinate, incurable, and fatal symptoms of a chronic distemper, than the agonizing but transient paroxysms of acute disease. It is in various ways working a wide de- struction of national resources, debasement of public and private morals, and increase of vulgar and ostentatious luxury stim- ulated by the fortuitous wealth of a few wrung from the im- poverishment of the many. The special causes and effects of this state of things we will soou notice more fully. Mean- while it has reached proportions which call for an examina- tion of its ethical and economic aspects, and an exposure of
1869.]
of Commercial Speculation.
237
some very common and plausible fallacies connected with it. But let us first look for an accurate definition of it, which, with- out being too broad or too narrow, will effectually distinguish it from genuine and normal trade. Sometimes the brief defini- tions of a good dictionary are quite as much to the point as any that can be framed. Webster defines speculation to be “in commerce the act or practice of buying land or goods, &c., in expectation of a rise of price and of selling them at an advance, as distinguished from a regular trade, in which the profit expected is the difference between the retail and whole- sale prices, or the difference of price in the place where the goods are purchased and the place to which they are carried for market. In England, France, and America, public stock is the subject of continual speculation. In the United States, a few men _have been enriched, but many have been ruined by speculation .” This is good as far as it goes ; it is, however? too narrow. We give our own conception of it more fully and completely as follows : —
By commercial speculation, as distinguished from normal and healthy trade, is meant purchasing goods, lands, stocks, or any species of property, for the purpose of making money by its anticipated advance in price, or selling them with a contract to deliver at some future time at a certain rate, in the expectation that the article thus sold and to be delivered, will so fall in the market before the time of deliveiw, that it can be furnished at a profit, at the price contracted for. This latter sort of speculation is mostly confined to public stocks, and is little else than simple unmitigated gambling. It has no feature of lawful trade. It is a simple throw of the dice for no purpose but to take the chances of winning or losing by it.
Normal trade, on the other hand, is the instrument for the exchange of commodities; for transferring articles from the producer to the consumer, in forms and amounts recipro- cally convenient to each. The difference between the price of purchase and of sale pays the trader a fair compensation for his services, skill, capital, risks, and expenses. The profit is, in short, his remuneration for a most important service ren- dered,— moving and distributing the commodities of the
233
Ethics and Economics
[April,
world where they are wanted. It does not vitiate this service if the goods rise in price in the trader’s hands. They are also liable to fall. All this belongs to the risks and chances of his occupation, which, in a steady and continuous business, are likely to balance each other.
Speculation, on the other hand, aims not to place commodi- ties where they are wanted, and to obtain a fit remuneration therefor, but simply to purchase, in expectation of a rise in the market for the sake of gaining the benefit of that rise, or to sell for future delivery, hoping to profit, in the manner already indicated, by a fall in prices meanwhile. Agreements to deliver at a future time goods to parties who need them, e. g. supplies to the government, or any parties who will need them, do not possess this character. This is legitimate business, which deserves compensation, and, whether the commodities rise or fall meanwhile, contracts no taint of gambling or vi- cious speculation. Beyond all other agencies, fluctuating and especially rising prices stimulate speculation. But such advances and fluctuations have, as all know, prevailed beyond all precedent during and since the late war; and to an extent which deeply vitiates the moral and material interests of out- country.
The features of the war which gave a preternatural ad- vance to prices, were — 1. The vastly increased consumption of and demand for commodities directly and indirectly consumed in prosecuting it, along with the immense proportion of the productive energies of the nation withdrawn from the work of production to that of destruction. 2. The vast additional rise in prices caused by the substitution of depreciated paper-money for gold or a currency convertible into it ; itself enough to raise prices 30 to 100 per cent, during and since the war. 3. The greatly increased taxes laid upon imports, and in forms direct and indirect upon domestic property and prod- ucts, causing an additional average advance scarcely less than that induced by the dilution of the currency. 4. The gen- eral rise in the price of goods throughout the civilized and commercial world, according to the gold standard, during the last quarter of a century, and especially the last decade, which is wholly independent of the foregoing causes. The relative
1869.]
239
of Commercial Speculation.
labor and cost of producing a given amount of gold lias been growing less, and of other tilings, in various degrees, greater. We know not the extent of this growing disproportion in detail. But the general average is easily evinced by certain undeniable facts. We see it stated that the Free Church of Scotland has just reached a point in her Sustentation Fund where she is able to pay, and does pay every minister the sum originally aimed at, and in a sort stipulated, at the Disruption, viz., £150, or nearly $750 gold. But in regard to this, an intelligent lady, the wife of an elder says, “ at last the Church in a literal sense, has redeemedjts pledge aud promise ; but observe bow in this interval of years circumstances have changed. Every thing lias been flying upward, as with wings. So that it is this year more difficult by one-third to keep house than it was in 1843. £200 now is not more than
equivalent to £150 then. With this increased rate of all domestic expenses came demands to employers from their employees for an increase in their pay. Yielding to this rea- sonable demand employers granted a rise. But no such augmentation of ministers’ stipends ensued.”
Thus from the increased facility of producing gold as com- pared with other products, there is an average rise, at the start, of full one-third in the average price of articles during the last quarter of a century. And of this the larger part has occurred since the war. In this country we may add more than fifty per cent, to this for the combined effect of deprecia- ted currency and increased duties. All these causes of high prices have survived the war, and continue, with only excep- tional abatement, and in full average force. Among these elements of influence, that of an irredeemable Currency, subject to constant and capricious fluctuations, produces those fluctua- tions of price which are the grand spring of speculation.
Concurrent with all this is the rapid advance in the price of lands, city and village lots, farms, and all real estate, not only from the causes already named which have enhanced the value of property improved or convenient to improvement, in pro- portion to the advance in the present increased cost of making such improvements, but from the prodigious advance of the railway system which makes new, and enlarges the old centres
240
Ethics and Economics
[April,
of commerce, and from tlie rapid recovery of the Southern plantations from the temporary annihilation of their marketable value by the war. This is well stated in the financial article of the Eeio York Observer of February 25, which says : —
“Tlie rapid strides which this country is taking in developing its resources, by means of increased facilities in transportation, both in land and water, are becoming evident in the steady advance in real estate all over the United States. In the Southern States good lands are selling at one and two hundred per cent, advance over last year’s prices. In California the rich ranches, which sold, a few years ago, at fifty cents per acre, now command ten and twenty dollars per acre. In the Western and Eastern States farms aU command higher prices than they did a few years ago, but do not show such a wide difference as in the South, or on the Pacific coast.
“In thecities lots are run up to almost fabulous prices. In San Francisco, St. Louis, Chicago, Cincinnati, and the numberless towns along the Pacific Railroad route, building plots have advanced to the highest prices yet attained. In- our own city and its suburbs the speculation in lots has become a perfect mania. Contracts running for sixty days before delivery of the deed are bought and sold almost as often as railway stocks in the Board of Brokers, and always at an advance, so that when the contract expires, and the lots are transferred to the last holder, it often happens that the difference in price realized by the original seller and that paid by the last buyer is 100 per cent. -This rapid advance is due partly to the growth of the city, the improvements made in laying out the upper part of the island, partly to the completion of the Pacific Railway, which will make New York the centre of exchange for the world, and the great con-v necling commercial city between China, the Pacific States, and Europe, and partly to the speculative fever,. which always oversteps the true value, causing a reac- tion, entailing heavy losses, and retarding a healthy growth in values.”
In regard to the ethical principles which govern this subject it may be observed : 1. That speculative purchases, in them- selves, belong to the class of things morally indifferent. They are not per se morally evil. That is to say, the mere invest- ment of money in property because it is expected to rise in price, is not morally wrong. If a man buys a piece of land, believing that the improvements and settlements in its vicinity will rapidly increase its market value, he commits no sin. It may he his duty thus to put his talents to use. Often in this sort of speculation a service is really rendered as a compensa- tion for the profit. The land, which is fixed capital, is taken, and circulative capital which can be used in business is given for it. The profit from its rise is the compensation for thus exchanging circulative for a fixed capital, and holding the latter until it is wanted for use. This procedure often assists
1869.]
241
of Commercial Speculation.
tlie productive power of the community, by putting active in place of dead capital, and in a position to sustain productive labor.
2. It appears from the foregoing, that the moral character of speculation depends upon its method, aim, and effects. Where these are evil, the speculation which involves them is evil, and in various degrees criminal and detestable. If it has the constituents of gambling, it has the moral obliquity of gambling. Therefore —
3. To make contracts, purchases, or ventures, in regard to which, according to the known laws of nature and providence, there can be no reasonable foresight or probability as to the issue, is wicked. This is simple gambling. It is throwing a dice to win or lose, without any rational ground of probability of one issue rather than the other, unless through some dis- honest contrivance, like loading the dice to determine the result, which is, of course, an immorality. Of this nature are all purchases or contracts in which there is the hope of gain from a prospective rise or fall in the article, for which there can be no more rational basis of anticipation than of the way the wind will blow for each of the next thousand consecutive hours. Surely this is mere gambling. It is virtually using the lot to decide our fortunes, when there is not only no occa- sion for its use, but its use is profane. It is committing our way, not to divine guidance, but to hap-hazard ; and tempting God to leave us to the merited punishment of such godless temerity. The only lawful place for the lot, except as a means of settling controversies, is where there is a necessity of some given action or the contrary, and there are no data known to us, or within reach, which can shed any light on the path of duty; then, in the absence of all other indications, the lot, or its equivalent, may be resorted to, with prayer for divine guidance to indicate our way. So “ the lot is cast into the lap, but the whole disposing thereof is of the Lord.” But those who employ the lot, or commit their way and fortunes to chance, when God has given other indications discoverable by the right use of our faculties, must expect to be abandoned by him to the consequences of their recklessness. At all events, risking our substance upon blind and fortuitous move-
24:2
Ethics and Economics
[April,
ments, which no call of duty requires us to make, is clearly immoral, irreligious, and usually, if persisted in, ruinous to all parties and interests concerned, for both worlds. It is indeed true, that .we are not gifted with a sure prevision of future events, in the ordinary sphere of legitimate action. But we know the tendency and ordinary result of a given course of legitimate action, when guided by the known laws of nature and providence. We do not know that an}’ particular case of planting in seed-time will be followed with a harvest. But we know that such is the ordinary result of proper planting and tillage, that without it there can be no crop ; that by means of it crops are obtained with sufficient regularity to provide for man and beast food convenient for them. We can ask the blessing and guidance of God on this most wholesome and salutary work. But can we ask his blessing on reckless adventures, not in the prosecution of any lawful business, or rendering any useful service, but a hap-hazard throw, which risks all that it can hope to gain, and produces nothing but the feverish and corrupt passions connected with gambling? It is true that gamblers in stocks, as well as those who resort to the technical games and instruments of the profession, often endeavor to influence the result by skill or fraud. This, how- ever, does not alter its essential nature as a game of chance. Instead of neutralizing, it aggravates its baneful influence. The fraud is in itself an immorality, and the skill is very apt to be tainted with fraud.
4:. All speculation which involves the use of arts and devices to raise prices above the normal standard and real values, is pernicious and immoral. This, of course, becomes so in proportion as the arts used are corrupt and profligate, and the articles so inflated are among the necessaries of life, or of the government. Is it not a flagrant wrong to use arti- ficial means to extort unreasonable prices from people for their food and raiment, merely to enrich the “ operator ” or spec- ulator ? AYhen we consider the vast numbers who are straitened for bread and clothing and shelter, is it not enormous cruelty thus to contrive to grow rich by urging them toward starvation or nakedness ? Suppose this is accom- plished by circulating false rumors of approaching scarcity, or
243
1869.] of Commercial Speculation.
by buying up or forming combinations to buy up the com- modity, so as to control the market ; is it not doing immense evil and no good, and in all respects a detestable and unprin- cipled procedure ? Even in regard to articles not among the necessaries of life, it is an unmixed evil to force them up beyond their proper value. It goes to unsettle all regular standards and measures ; to throw incertitude and chance into business, and to spread a spirit of speculation and gambling in place of regular trade and productive industry. What other effect can arise from forcing, as has been done by specu- lative cornering, flour, butter, cotton to twice, and 'stocks to twelve times their real and ordinary market value.* There- fore—
5. To buy on speculation an article in which large numbers are speculating for an illegitimate rise, is virtually, though, perhaps, unconsciously, to aid in forming a combination to promote the rise. If this rise is injurious to great public in- terests or to the people generally, it seems to us the duty of all to abstain from whatever promotes it. Thus, if under the expectation that gold will rise, parties buy and keep it out of market in order to aggravate the rise, and share in the profit of it, they, in this way contribute to the advance, and to all the evils, financial and economical, to the people and the government thence resulting. Undoubtedly the factitious rise of gold has been largely promoted in this way. We have honored those patriotic and principled brokers and capitalists who, on this ground, have conscientiously refrained from all
* Judge Davenport, of the bench in Connecticut in a former generation, was noted for his Puritanic sternness, which often seemed angular, harsh, and repul- sive. In a season of short crops and great scarcity he had ample stores of corn and his granaries were full. He sold his surplus to those in need at the usual rates, refusing the famine prices of the markets, and trusted or gave away to those who were unable to pay him. But when a man of property desired to purchase some corn at these prices, he sternly refused, saying, “You are able to supply yeur wants at market rates ; the poor cannot ; I hold my supply as God’s steward for them.” There was more worth, manhood, nobility, and philanthropy, to say nothing of piety, under his austere and almost ursine garb, than in a legion of the sleek, pampered, polite men of this day, who do not hesitate, by dishonest manipulations and speculative maneuvres, to devour widows’ houses and orphans’ bread, even though, like their prototypes of old, they may for a pretence say long prayers.
vol. xli. — no. n. 96
244
Ethics and Economics
[April,
participation in -gold speculations. The same principles hold good in regard to ordinary articles -of subsistence, clothing, provisions, groceries, government supplies in war, &c. No one is justified in aggrandizing himself by endangering the government, and aggravating the sufferings of the poor. All speculation, as distinguished from proper mercantile and busi- ness dealings in gold, and articles of prime necessity to the government and the people, in times of scarcity or advancing prices, tends to this disastrous issue, and may well be shunned by good men.
6. AH'speculation which thrives on the disasters of the peo- ple, the nation, or government, and tempts those engaged in it to magnify such disasters, or to give currency to false and exaggerated reports of their occurrence, works evil and evil only. No one should willingly place himself in a business which thrives only in proportion as the national credit, resources, and arms are crippled. It is notorious that in the late war many speculators in gold, and in commodities rising in price with it, exaggerated every real disaster, and circulated groundless rumors of defeat to our arms, and de- struction to our credit. These efforts to weaken the govern- ment, tended to make real the very evils they falsely imputed to it. It is impossible for a public enemy to deal heavier or more malignant blows at the people or the government, than those who are engaging in speculations which do no good but evil only, and which depend for success on the disparagement of our na- tional arms, credit, and resources ; on the privations of our poor, the embarrassment of our government, and the triumph of those in arms against it. Of course, all such false rumors are wicked on account of their falsehood. But they are wicked still further, as are the speculations which prompt them, as striking at the life of the nation. Still worse are all specula- tive purchases and sales, which, in addition to the foregoing features, are merely nominal, fictitious, and pretended.
The ethics of speculation are not exhausted till we consider not only on what conditions it is in itself morally right or wrong, but how far it is demoralizing in its effects. This con- sequence is so implicated with its economic effects, or its bearings on the material resources of the country, that the
1869.]
245
of Commercial Speculation.
presentation of the one is the presentation of the other. And they have been so far involved in the preceding discussion that what now needs to he said of either requires but few words.
It is a vulgar delusion that illegitimate speculation, or any thing, be it dram-selling, or keeping billiard-rooms, or houses of prostitution, by which individuals accumulate large or sudden fortunes, is productive of wealth. It is a “ money- making ” occupation — therefore it is a wealth-creating busi- ness. There can be no greater fallacy. As well might it be said that those who accumulate property by theft and robbery are creators of public wealth. They produce nothing. They add nothing to the mass of property. They only pilfer and consume. So the successful speculator lives and thrives by dexterous or hap-hazard moves which produce nothing and render no service, but merely succeed in raiding or levying upon the products and savings of the labor of the whole com- munity. He does nothing for the production, transmission, or distribution of commodities. If he makes money, it is not by rendering any equivalent to the community, but by sponging upon the hard earnings of the people. Speculators, as a class, are the leeches that glut themselves with the life-blood of honest laborers, until they for the most part suddenly collapse, and disgorge their ill-gotten gains. To the speculator him- self his occupation is every way baneful. It turns him into an adventurer, gambler, idler, any thing but a man of steady, honest, useful industry. It makes “ fast ” men, spendthrifts, epicureans, voluptuaries. Its whole influence on character is “ earthly, sensual, devilish.” Its usual ultimate effects on for- tune are scarcely better than on character. The fortunes of speculators, like those of gamblers, are generally lost more rapidly than they are gained. The reckless throws by which they are acquired, are almost sure to forfeit them.
To all others, including the entire community or nation, its mischiefs are manifold and aggravated. It enhances the cost of the article speculated in, and, if general, of commodi- ties generally, not only as it aims to raise prices, but as it lessens the number of producers, by tempting men away from productive occupations to live by speculative adventure ;
246 Ethics and Economics [April,
while it increases consumption by stimulating useless and ex- travagant expenditure on the part of those suddenly enriched, and spreads the infection of luxurious extravagance through the community. Hence is propagated a contagious mania for speculation, fast fortunes, with an aversion to the slow methods of honest industry. Thus are aggravated the tendencies to prevailing luxury, effeminacy, vice, dissipation, and demoral- ization of every sort, consequent thereon. It enriches the speculators by a suction upon the poor, by intensifying their trials and privations, and by a forced levy on those classes least able to bear it. It proportionally weakens the national life, cuts the sinews of its strength, and in case of war disables it for the life-struggle in which it is straining every nerve. It deranges the regular course of production and exchange, and infuses irregularity and capricious fluctuations into all indus- trial pursuits.
It almost invariably, and, as if in righteous retribution, ends in a crash of the fortunes of speculators themselves, which, in proportion to its extent, culminates in a commercial crisis or panic, with all its familiar attendant, disastrous phenomena — the terror of the commercial world.
Worst of all, it is even more destructive to public morality and religion than to the national wealth. At this very moment, no other foe antagonizes more powerfully and. fatally with the virtue and piety of the country.
The immense harvest offered to speculators, in these days, they have not been slow to reap. Probably history affords no such example of gambling in stocks, and of fortunes suddenly made by it, as Wall Street during the last five years. The success achieved iu the speculative inflation of stocks, by devi- ces and “ corners ” and “ pools ” to control the market and force prices, has spread the contagion into other departments of traffic, and stimulated attempts to perform a similar process on all the great necessaries of life — and, we are sorry to say, with far too great success. It has, indeed, become a passion with a large class of men, who are content with nothing short of sudden fortunes, acquired by a few adventurous and desperate moves, and spent faster than they are gained.
1869.] of Commercial Speculation. 217
The movements of the great operators have become perfect- ly enormous and colossal. We are stunned by the very men- tion of them. A “ railroad king ” is reputed to have made ten millions of dollars in a single day. Whether such are the exact figures or not, the stupendous vastness of the amount is beyond dispute. Others have obtained the control of gigantic railroad corporations, and secretly manufactured and sold their securities by millions and tens of millions, in order to form a fund vast enough to control the loan market, raise or depress prices at pleasure, and amass colossal fortunes by a single turn of a wheel huge enough to crush out and annihilate the property, the sustenance, the food, and the raiment of thousands of worthy and upright men. The lying, fraud, im- postures employed thus to rob the people of millions, involve an enormity of guilt, in comparison with which the ordinary thefts, robberies, and crimes which doom to a felon’s cell, are mere peccadilloes. The breaches of trust committed by the directors of many of our great public corporations in adminis- tering the property, without regard to the interests of innocent stockholders, including many widows and orphans, intrusted to them, have been rarely paralleled in history. IIow con- stantly do many of them resort to artifices to depress the stock in the market that they may buy it at low rates of innocent and feeble stockholders alarmed by their maneuvring, then producing and taking advantage of the reactionary rise, nor- mal and abnormal, to sell at a prodigious profit. What is this but fraud and robbery, under the forms of contract and law, on the most stupendous scale? And how deplorable is the debasement of society when wealth and wickedness are so widely preferred to integrity with competency, or poverty, or even beggary.
The insanity of the speculative spirit is, perhaps, just now' most broadly developed in regard to some real or pretended varieties of the simple esculent that is so common an article of daily food. The extent of the delusion, as revealed by the public press, wrould stagger belief, had not all ages shown to wdiat lengths the speculative mania can go. One paper, speaking of the sale of a new variety, says : “ Sixteen potatoes brought $825, twelve potatoes brought $615, one brought $50,
24S Fronde's History of England. [April,
and one was traded for a good cow valued at $60.” Another paper tells of a man in Vermont who “bought one eve of a potato, and raised from it, this season, potatoes that he has sold for $750, and has three left. Eight were bought by one man for 8400. Merino bucks, at from $1,000 to $5,000, were common in Vermont a few years ago, but they were small po- tatoes beside those of to-day.” It would be easy to till a page with like statements.
It is obvious that when lands, houses, commodities of all sorts are actively and widely dealt in at prices many times their value, or greatly exceeding their value, no existing amount of currency in the country, however great, can keep pace with them. A continual proportionate increase of cur- rency is required in the purchase and sale of articles so aug- mented in price. Hence the tendency toward an alleged scarcity of money, and a demand for an increased issue of in- convertible greenbacks, which can only still further embarrass and delay the return to a currency convertible into coin. So far from curing the disease for which it is prescribed, such a measure will only aggravate it. Although loudly demanded by one of our religious journals, to medicate present financial evils, it would be like cramming a dyspeptic, to relieve his debility by sating his morbid appetite, or treating a drunkard to an increase of potations.
Against the alarming inroads of the fever of speculation and so many other evils growing out of the passion for sudden wealth, sensual luxury, and coarse ostentation, good men should set their faces. May the Spirit of the Lord lift up a standard against this enemy which cometh in as a flood.
Art. VI. — History of England , from the fall of Wolsey to the death of Elizabeth. By James Anthony Froude, M. A., late Fellow of Exeter College, Oxford. Yew York: Chas. Scribner 6c Co., 1867. 10 vols.
We do not know whether the publishers of this work have as yet received any thing like a proper return for the very large outlay which the publication of it must have involved. They
1869.] Fronde's History of England. 249
certain!}7 deserve, as we trust they will obtain, an ample recoin pense for the enterprising spirit which prompted them, at what must have seemed no small risk, to give to the American public these interesting volumes, in a style which does the highest credit to the printer as wrell as the publisher.
The work itself is one of the most elaborate and valuable contributions to historical literature which has been produced in our day. It gives a far more thorough insight into the character of the men, and the nature of the transactions of the period to which it refers, than any other work in our lan- guage. The period measured by years simply wTould be of no great account, but it is one so crowded with events pregnant with influences which have not only reached our own times, but are even now working mightily in the most distant regions of the earth, that the story of it, properly told, is quite long enough to fill more than ten volumes, as it promises to do, before the author completes his task. Of course, we do not imagine that all who peruse these volumes will fully accept Mr. Froude’s estimate of the chief actors during this stirring age. The parties to which it gave birth still exist, and are as antagonistic as ever ; and on various points, his conclusions come in conflict with the traditional, we may even say, the inveterate prejudices both of Romanists and Protestants. But we are confident that every fair-minded reader will admit that his work evin- ces the most painstaking and laborious research, that it every- where exhibits a spirit of candor and liberality for which Anglican Churchmen and Oxonians have not been hitherto remarkable, and that in the construction of his narrative, the author handles his materials with the artistic skill of a master of historic composition.
It may be proper here to say that the materials of which Mr. Froude has been enabled to avail himself, are far ampler and more varied than those which were within the reach of any one who had previously attempted to investigate this portion of English history. Besides those which have been accumulating in Britain in the course of three centuries, he has had free access to the archives of Spain, Belgium, France Holland, and Venice, including the hitherto unpublished cor- respondence, official and private, of Charles V., Philip II.
250 Fronde's History of England. [April,
Catherine de Medici, Charles IX., Alva, Cardinal Pole, and the ambassadors of the various Continental powers at the English court. It is natural to suppose that these letters written by living witnesses would clear up many points of historic inter- est, which have been hitherto more or less obscure, or in regard to which opposite judgments have obtained ; and almost every page of his work bears witness to the care with which Mr. Froude has studied them.
In his introductory chapter, Mr. Froude takes a rapid sur- vey of the political, ecclesiastical, and social condition of Eng- land at the beginning of the sixteenth century. As it does not come within the design of this article to dwell upon any one of these topics, we shall simply say, that he has given us a picture of the England of the sixteenth century, which is scarcely less graphic than that which Macaulay has drawn of the England of the seventeenth ; and that we do not know where one can find so much information on the above-men- tioned points compressed into such narrow compass.
The starting point of this history is the divorce of Catherine of Aragon by Henry Till. — an event quite insignificant in itself, involving only the happiness of a single couple, yet one that was really the hinge on which turned events of transcend- ent moment, the destinies of a mighty kingdom. So it has not unfrequentlv happened in the experience of nations and of individuals, that what, at the time, seemed trivial incidents have had involved in them grand and far-reaching results, as if to make visible to man the truth that there is a Providence which orders all human affairs, the mightiest and the most minute. If Ilenry and Wolsey could have foreseen the con- sequences to the kingdom and the Church of England, which flowed from the divorce of Catherine, who can doubt that the prospect would have appalled them, and driven the project forever from their minds. But while they meant only, by means of it, to get rid of a personal inconvenience, or to guard against danger in regard to the succession to the throne, God designed that they should unconsciously give a fatal blow to an organized system of iniquity, embracing church and state, the growth of many centuries, and which seemed as firmly fixed as the solid earth. As this work of Mr. Froude is really,
1869.] Fronde's History of England. 251
though uot in name, a history of the English Reformation, we think that he wisely chose to make the divorce of Cathe- rine his starting-point.
What caused the divorce ? Many think that the answer to this question may he given in a single sentence, viz., that it had its origin in the sensual appetite of Henry, who having grown weary of his wife, was looking round for a decent excuse to get rid of her, so that he might marry another woman with whom he had fallen in love. Mr. Froude’s theory of the case, if we may use the phrase, is a widely different one. It is expressed essentially in the words which Shakespeare puts into Henry’s own mouth, in explanation of his conduct in this affair.
“• Thus it came : —
My conscience first received a tenderness,
Scruple and prick, on certain speeches uttered By the Bishop of Bayonne, then French ambassador ;
Who had been hither sent on the debating A marriage ’twixt the Duke of Orleans and Our daughter Mary : I’ the progress of this business,
Ere a determinate resolution, he (I mean the bishop) did require a respite ;
Wherein he might the king his lord advertise Whether our daughter were legitimate,
Respecting this our marriage with the dowager,
Some time our brother’s wife. This respite shook The bosom of my conscience, entered me,
Yea, with a splitting power. —
— First, methought,
I stood not in the smile of heaven. —
— Then follows, that
I weighed the danger which my realms stood in By this my issue’s fail.”
Did the great poet draw the materials of this speech purely from his own fancy, or did he embody in it the prevalent belief of his countrymen in that day ? That the Bishop of Bayonne did raise a difficulty in regard to the legitimacy of the Princess Mary is beyond dispute. He was perfectly aware that a Papal dispensation had been obtained for the marriage of Henry and Catherine, but the inquiry which he started was, whether it was within the power of the Pope, under any cir- cumstances,'to set aside what all Christendom had for ages accepted as the divine law of incest. If in giving the dispen- sation the Pope had transcended his authority, the inference
252 Fronde’s History of England. [Apkil,
was a very plain one, and a very serious one in its bearing on Ilenry as a man and as a monarch. If this were so, he was living in what was then regarded as a deadly sin, and his people would be in danger of a renewal of those conflicts for the succession, in which the best blood of England had been poured out like water, unless some way was discovered to get quit of a relationship into which he had been unwittingly betrayed through his father’s greed and the Pope’s mistake. In that age such a prospect might well have “shook” any man’s “conscience” “with a splitting power.” Mr. Froude admits that differences had already arisen between Ilenry and Catherine, both of whom had imperious tempers and were indomitably obstinate, differences which, though in them- selves reflecting no discredit on husband or wife, were sufficient to extinguish marital affection. But he maintains that up to the time of the negotiations for the marriage of his daughter Mary, there is no evidence that the idea of a divorce, so that he might marry another wife, had entered his mind.
The determination of the question, which of these views of the origin of the divorce is the true one, will largely depend upon our judgment of the conduct and character of Ilenry during the earlier years of his reign.
What sort of a man, then, was Henry VIII. ? The answer Mr. Froude gives to this inquiry is, that if Henry had died at the moment when the divorce was first agitated, his loss would have been deplored as one of the heaviest misfortunes which had befallen the country, and he would have left a name which would have taken its place in history by the side of that of the Black Prince or of the conqueror of Agincourt. Left at the most trying age, with his character unformed, with the means at his disposal of gratifying every inclination, married when a boy of eighteen to a woman six years his senior, he had lived for thirty-six years almost without blame, and bore through England the reputation of an upright and a virtuous king. His form and bearing were princely. His intellectual abilities are attested by his state papers and letters, which lose nothing in the comparison with those of Moisey or of Cromwell, lie had a fine musical taste, carefully cultivated. He spoke and wrote fluently in four languages. He was one of the best
I860.] Froudds History of England. 253
physicians of his age. He was his own engineer, inventing improvements in artillery and in ship-building, and this not with the condescending incapacity of a royal amateur, hut with thorough workmanlike understanding. While thus dis- playing natural powers of the highest order, at the highest stretch of industrious culture, Henry was “ attentive to his religious duties,” according to the ideas of the times, and seemed, at least, to show a real sense of religious obligation in the energy and purity of his life. In private life he was good- humored and good-natured; and in his relations with his sec- retaries and the members of his household, he seems to have been always kind and considerate, inquiring into their private concerns with genuine interest, and winning, as a consequence, their warm and unaffected attachment. During the whole of his married life with Catherine, he was never known to have been unfaithful to her, except in a solitary instance, a circum- stance all the more remarkable when we remember how grossly licentious were most of the royal and princely families of Europe in that age. As a ruler he had been eminently popular. All his wars had been successful. Like all princes of the Plantagenet blood, he had a most intense and imperi- ous will ; but with all his faults, he was still, perhaps, the greatest of his contemporaries, and of all living Englishmen, the man best able to govern England.
This portrait of Henry in his thirty-sixth year, is certainly a very brilliant one, and it differs very widely from the pic- ture which Ilume has drawn, and which his readers •would naturally suppose applied to him during the whole of his reign. While he admits that Henry possessed great mental vigor, and at intervals was not wholly destitute of virtues, yet he says that “a catalogue of his vices would comprehend many of the worst qualities incident to human nature, — violence, cruelty, profusion, rapacity, injustice, obstinacy, arrogance, bigotry, presumption, caprice.” But be adds, it may seem — as it cer- tainly does — a little extraordinary, that in spite of this terrible array of vices, “ this prince not only acquired the regard of his subjects, but was never the object of their hatred, and he seems even in some degree to have possessed their love and affection to the last.” The only explanation of this singular anomaly,
254 Fronde's History of England. [April,
which Hume suggests is, that the English people had just then sunk into such a condition of oriental slavery, that they gloried in their shame, and loved all the more ardently the king who treated them as his slaves.
How it is not surprising that those whose idea of Henry’s personal character are derived from Hume’s account of him, should not only he startled hy that of Froude, hut that they should even go so far, as some have done, as to charge the latter with having “ whitewashed,” the monarch whom they have been accustomed to regard as a bloody and beastly ty- rant, who divorced two of his six wives, and beheaded two others.
It is quite possible that Mr. Fronde’s portrait of Henry is too highly colored, but it should he borne in mind that it is pro- fessedly a portrait of him as he appeared before any thing had occurred to disturb his domestic relations, or to awaken his anxieties respecting the future of his kingdom. Then, too, it should be remembered that Mr. Froude had sources of infor- mation which were unknown to Hume, — -the testimonies of contemporary witnesses, English and foreign, — and these fully confirm his statements. For example, we cannot suppose that the Venetian ambassador could have had any reason for draw- ing a flattering picture of Henry, in writing to his own gov- ernment, yet in one of his dispatches, he declares that “ he had few equals” in personal endowments and mental accom- plishments. “ He speaks English, French, Spanish, Latin, un- derstands Italian well ; plays on almost every instrument ; sings and composes fairly ; is prudent, sage, and free from every vice.” This is a single specimen out of a great mass of contemporaneous authorities, and they all agree in their ac- counts of Henry during the earlier years of his reign. But almost from the day on which his domestic troubles began, he had to grapple with events, at home and abroad, which would have sorely tried a much more patient man than himself, and what were well fitted to develop the worst elements of his nature.
As might be expected, Mr. Froude goes very fully into a history of the divorce. The negotiations in regard to it were protracted during six weary years, but from the time that the
1869.]
Fronde's History of England.
255
first step was taken by Henry to free himself from a marital bond of doubtful legitimacy, he had the warmest sympathy of all classes of his subjects, of Parliament, of churchmen, and the mass of the people, — sympathies which had their origin in the well-founded dread of a renewal of those terrible wars of the Roses, the memory of which was so fresh, and the traces of which were still visible in all parts of England. To the Prot. estant this history is profoundly interesting, for as he reads it he cannot fail to discover the most striking proofs that it was no accident that connected a suit for divorce with the refor- mation of religion. On the other hand, we do not see how any sincere and candid Romanist can go over this record with- out experiencing feelings of disgust and shame, even if his faith in the dogma of Papal infallibility is not seriously shaken- A prompt decision of the question when it was first raised, in- any way, might, and if favorable to Henry’s wishes certainly would have bound England indissolubly to Rome, although the Pope might have been thereby subjected to temporary trouble at the hands of Charles V". But granting that he might be brought into personal peril, he claimed to be the Vicar of God, the Father of Christendom, and what was this transcendent authority worth, if its possessor was deterred from deciding so grave a matter by the fear of man ? If Hen- ry had been dealing with such a Pope as Julius II. or Innocent X. he would probably have got a speedy answer, and England would have been saved to the Papacy; but fortunately for the cause of true religion and human freedom, the occupant of the Papal throne at the time was Clement VII. And he found himself in a most distressing dilemma. He would willingly oblige Henry, but he could not do it without mortally offend- ing Charles. Accordingly his promise to speak ex cathedra was hardly given before it was taken back ; he said and un- said, sighed, sobbed, beat his breast, shuffled, implored, threat- ened, in all ways trying to say yes, to say no, to do nothing, to offend no one, above all to gain time, hoping that something “ would turn up” to extricate him. After long urging, he sends a legate to England with plenary power to decide the cause, but the court is hardly opened, ere a difficulty of his own making arises, and the affair is transferred to Rome,
25G
Fronde’s History of England.
[April,
whither he might have known that Henry would never come. Once when urged by Gardiner that if he longer delayed his decision, the king and nobility of England might be forced to “ the hard conclusion that God had taken from the See of Rome the key of knowledge,” Clement replied wittily enough, yet very strangely for one claiming to be God’s Vicar on earth, “ to speak truth, albeit there was a saying in the canon law that the Pope has all laws locked within his breast, yet God had never given him the. key to open that lock.”
The ‘‘key” which Clement either could not, or would not use, Henry, at length wearied out with the delays and the tergiversation of the Pontiff, resolved to search for in England, or to make one for himself. He found one that answered his purpose. He, in part, solved the problem which had so puzzled the Pope, in his own way, and by his marriage with Anne Boleyn took a position from which it was impossible for him to recede. Even this step, however, did not necessa- rily involve a permanent rupture with Rome, as the most sagacious members of the Papal conclave clearly saw. Henry never had any real sympathy with Protestantism, and at this juncture the English nation certainly had none. Both were supremely anxious that Henry should have an heir to the throne, of whose legitimacy there could be neither doubt nor question. This point secured, they would have been more than content with the old religion. They would much rather have had the night, to which they and their fathers were accustomed, — the night, with its starry firmament of saints and ceremonies, than the day, for which reformers longed with the single lustre of the Gospel sun. And if the Pope had then annulled the previous marriage with Catherine, as his wisest cardinals ( i . e., wisest in the Roman sense) urged him to do, England would have remained as firmly bound to the Papacy as France or Spain.
Mr. Froude discusses at some length the questions to which the sad history of Queen Anne Boleyn has given rise, and he has collected probably a larger amount of contemporary testimony bearing upon them than any previous writer. Romanists have attempted, for obvious reasons, to load her memory with slanders, whose vileness is only equalled by their
I860.]
Fronde's History of England.
257
absurdity. The historian dismisses them with the contempt which they deserve. It is quite possible, however, that Prot- estants have been, in some measure, swayed by their partisan sympathies, in forming their estimate of Anne as a Christian woman, and of her conduct before and after her marriage to Henry. Dr. Merle d’Aubigne, for example, invariably speaks of her in the most glowing terms of admiration, as one not only radiant in youthful beauty, but rich in the endowments of a noble nature. She had been “ attracted toward the doctrine of the Gospel in the society of Margaret of Valois.” — “ Her cause was identified with that light, liberty, and new life which have distinguished modern times.” — “ The idol to which she had sacrificed every thing — the splendor of a throne — did not satisfy her longings for happiness. She look- ed within herself, and found once more, as queen, that for those who have every thing, as well as those who have nothing^ there is only one single good— -God himself.” — “ Catherine died in disgrace, but in peace ; while the youthful Anne, sepa- rated from her friends, died alone on the scaffold. If on the one side there was innocence and disgrace, on the other there was innocence and martyrdom.” Mr. Fronde’s picture of Anne is, by no means, so attractive; and Dr. Merle d’Aubigne, while bearing emphatic testimony to the great value of his history, and to his hearty sympathy with the Reformation, takes decided exception to this part of it. But in expressing his dissent, we think that Dr. Merle does Mr. Fronde injustice in representing him as holding up Henry as “a model king,” and all Henry’s “ victims as criminals.” It is trim that Mr. Froude does not believe that Anne was the almost saintly personage that Dr. Merle describes her to have been. “ If,” he says, “ we are to hold her entirely free from fault, we place not the king only, but the privy council, the judges, the Lords and Commons, and the two Houses of Convocation in a posi- tion fatal to their honor, and degrading to ordinary humanity.” Anne Boleyn accompanied the Princess Mary to France, on her marriage with Louis XII., and she remained at the French court for nine years. Mr. Froude is evidently inclined to think, that a young girl like her could not breathe for so long a pe- riod the poisonous atmosphere of the most profligate court in
258
Fronde's History of England. [April,
Europe, in that day, and escape wholly untainted. But the main point in her melancholy history, is the charge which in- volved her character as a wife. Mr. Froude has collected all the accessible evidence of contemporary witnesses, — the only kind of evidence in this case which is of any value ; — he has attempted to exhibit this evidence on either side with judicial impartiality, but he does not himself pronounce an absolute verdict.
But whether the charge against Anne was true or false, the last scene in the life of one, so young and beautiful, who had been so suddenly raised to the most exalted position in the king- dom, and was so quickly called to exchange the crown for the scaffold, is fitted to awaken only the deepest pity of every right, feeling man. It is impossible to excuse or palliate the barbaric cruelty of Henry, who horrified England with a spectacle, such as had never before been seen in that land, and one never to be repeated except by himself, the spectacle of a queen dying by the hand of the executioner. If this act of cruelty had stood alone, it would have sufficed to affix an indelible stain to his memory. But it was simply the first of a long series of hideous executions, which made the last half of his reign more Draconian in character than that of any sovereign who ever sat upon the English throne, with the possible excep- tion of his daughter, the Bloody Mary.
Amid these deeds of blood, one act of Henry’s deserves to be mentioned to his credit. While from time to time laying his heavy hand on Papist and Protestant alike, he seems to have had a real regard for good old “Father Latimer,” — the most illustrious name in the catalogue of Anglican prelates. This bold, honest, unflinching, and eloquent preacher of righ- teousness was often beset by enemies thirsting for his life ; they repeatedly fancied that they had him safe in their toils, but while Henry lived he threw over the faithful bishop the shield of his protection.
Next to Henry, the most important personage on the historic canvas of Mr. Froude is Elizabeth.
The translators of King James’ version of the English Bi- ble, in the dedication of their work to him, speak of Elizabeth as “ that bright occidental star and from their day to ours,
I860.] Fronde’s History of England. 259
British writers have been accustomed to describe her, as one of the greatest of English sovereigns, and her reign to have been as glorious in its results, as it was long in years. The age of Elizabeth was one marked by great achievements in literature, religion, and politics. Elizabeth was welcomed to the throne, not only without a dissentient voice, but with the warmest acclamations of all classes, Catholic and Protestant, who regarded her as the morning star of England’s hope. She was the favorite child of Henry. The Reformers looked upon her as their child and pupil, whose life was supposed to have been in peril from the bigotry, or jealousy of Mary ; and the Catholic peers supported her as the best security for the maintenance of the Spanish alliance. During her reign the triumph of the Reformation was secured throughout the whole of Britain, and England then took the position, which she has ever since held, as the first among the Protestant powers of Europe. Much was done during this period to break the shackles in which superstition and misrule had bound the en- ergies of the English people, and unseal and give activity to those fountains of influence, which have been so long felt in the most distant regions of the earth.
In reviewing the Elizabethan period of English history, which embraces nearly half a century, it is a natural inquiry, how far did it take its impress from the character of Elizabeth herself. To what extent did.she give to it its color and com- plexion ? Mr. Fronde shows by his occasional remarks respect- ing her, that he shares to some extent in the traditional admi- ration which the mass of his countrymen have been accus- tomed to feel for the “ virgin queen,” as she is commonly, though, there is too much reason to suspect, untruthfully called. As his account of her reign is not yet finished, we shall, probably, have to wait for its closing chapter to give us his full estimate of her as a woman and a queen, But we think that no one can read these volumes, without being convinced that the grandest results of her reign were achieved not only without her, but in spite of her ; that if she had been allowed to reap the fruits of her own folly, fickleness, and downright treachery, she would have repeatedly wrecked her own for- tunes and those of her kingdom. The Reformers, as we have VOL. xli. — no. xi. 97
260 Froudds History of England. [April,
said, regarded her, at first, as their child and pupil. But while she was unwilling to become the vassal of the Pope, she had no real love for Protestantism in any of its forms ; 'and if she could have had her own way in ecclesiastical matters, she would have preferred the mongrel sort of church which Hen- ry had fashioned for himself. In any aspect of the case, no time woman, with the noblest instincts of womanhood, could ever have allowed herself to hold such relations as those in which Elizabeth notoriously stood to Leicester and her other favorites. Her recently published private correspondence with her various “lovers,” in the judgment of the most sober of English critics, casts the gravest doubts upon her womanly purity.*
She might have been a very bad woman, and yet a very great queen. And such a queen we should be obliged to esteem her if the growth of England into one of the mightiest of European empires had been wholly or mainly owing to her guiding hand, or if the predominance of a great minister is a certain sign of the existence of a great sovereign. Eliza- beth had, as chief counsellor, Cecil, one of the greatest if not the greatest statesman that England has ever produced. Oft- en, however, did she thwart him ; often was she on the point of breaking with him, though she never did it, and in this she certainly displayed her good sense. But repeatedly, in the course of her reign, the wisdom and the energies of Cecil were tasked to the utmost, to prevent the consequences of her crooked and vacillating policy, and to save her from reaping the fruits of her own toll}'. Cecil was a devoted and clear-sighted friend of the Reformation cause. To bind Eng- land to that cause by ties which could not be ruptured, was one of the grand aims of his life ; and for the enduring tri- umph of Protestantism within her domain, England is indebt- ed, as Mr. Froude has clearly demonstrated, not so much to the wisdom of Elizabeth, as to the genius, the sagacity, the sleepless vigilance and energy of Cecil.
The character of Elizabeth as a queen, and the sort of policy in which she indulged, when she managed matters in her own way, are very well illustrated in the negotiations
* London Quarterly, vol. xlii., 107.
1869.] Fronde's History of England. 261
respecting her proposed marriage with, the French Dnke d’A. lencon. The object of this marriage, to which she seemed quite inclined, and which all her counsellors warmly advo- cated, was to bind France and England together, with a view to help the struggling Netherlands, and to curb the power of Spain. As usual, Elizabeth acted, in this affair, very much as Clement did in regard to the divorce, — she said yes and she said no ; she promised, and trifled, and even did worse. Although it must remain uncertain, says Mr. Froude, whether “the infernal bigotry” which produced the St. Bartholomew massacre in the following year (1572) could have been held under effective restraint, yet those who saw that crisis upon them believed at the time, that by the marriage of the queen of England with Anjou or Alen^on (both of whom were proposed), and by that alone, fetters would have been forged of sufficient strength to bind it. France and England linked together by a stronger tie than words, would have freed the Netherlands from Spain. The Catholic states of Germany could have been swept into the stream of the Reformation, and Europe might have escaped the thirty years’ war. Elizabeth might justly enough have said, that she could not risk her personal happiness, and perhaps make herself the laughing- stock of Europe, by her union with a boy nearly twenty years her junior. But there is “ no excuse for the false and foolish trifling which exhausted the patience and irritated the pride of the royal family of France, and weakened the already too feeble barriers which were keeping back the tide of Catholic fury.’ ’
Beside these barriers, which held back the fury of the more fanatical of their own subjects, stood Charles IX. and his mother, Catherine de Medici ; so eager were they for this per- sonal union, and through it the alliance of the two kingdoms. For a good while they shut their eyes to the evidences of Elizabeth’s insincerity. Charles gave to Europe a proof, if not of his sympathy with the Huguenot cause, of his disposition to be on good terms with the Huguenot leaders and their party, by marrying Margaret to the young king of Navarre. The fiercer Catholics had struggled desperately to prevent this marriage, but Charles had been resolute, and in
262 Fronde’s History of England. [April,
a kindly message to Elizabeth, expressed the hope that his sister’s would not be the only marriage on which those who wished well to Europe would have to congratulate them- selves.
Now at this juncture there were two courses open to Eliza- beth, both of them honorable, either of which would have per- fectly satisfied France, and one or other of which Cecil and her ablest statesmen earnestly entreated her to adopt. One was to marry Alencon. Or if she could not bring herself to enter into a union, she might have declined it, as she could have done without offence, on the ground of inequality of age, but at the same time she should have given a security for her alliance with him, in his war against Spain and his helping the Netherlanders, in doing which she would have had the hearty sympathy of her own people. She adopted neither of these courses. While Charles was, for the sake of alliance with her, running the risk of the fierce hostility of a powerful party in France, she was not only amusing him with hopes which she never meant to realize, but she even made proposals to the bloody Alva, Philip’s lieutenant in the Netherlands, to get possession of the town of Flushing, and then to hand it over to Alva. It is possible, says Froude, that in this she was trying “ some cunning stroke of diplo- matic treachery ; or again — but conjectures are useless. It is enough to say that if she was sincere, she was without excuse ; if she was insincere, never was a trick more stupidly played, or a moment more unfortunate selected to play it in.”
When Charles and his mother Catherine were made acquainted with this proposed piece of treachery on Eliza- beth’s part, as they soon were by Alva himself, what other result could be expected than the sudden and total downfall of those barriers which had kept back the tide of Popish bigotry and fury. The Huguenots, who had been indulging high hopes for the future, were thrown off their guard, and soon all Christendom, with the exception of the Pope and the cardinals at Rome, were horrified by the tales of what had been done in Paris on the eve of St. Bartholomew.
Our space will not permit us to enter at length into illus- trations of Elizabeth’s character as a woman and a monarch,
1869.]
Froude's History of England.
263
which are furnished by the history of her Scottish policy. Mr. Froude admits that a large share of the guilt involved in the anarchy, the fierce, bloody, desolating struggles under which Scotland suffered for years, lies at her door.
When Mary Stuart, on the 19th of August, 1561, landed at Leith to take possession of her hereditary throne, the Reforma- tion had made such progress in Scotland, that a large part of the nobility, gentry, and commons of the kingdom was arrayed beneath its banner. There was not only a Protestant party, but one so strong, that they had been able to remodel the Church after the Reformed standard.
Of Mary herself, it may be proper here to say, that nature had bestowed upon her, in liberal measure, mental and per- sonal endowments, which, if she had been trained under healthful moral influences, would have made her one of the noblest of royal women. She wanted neither the faculties to cohceive a great purpose, nor the abilities necessary to carry it into effect. Luxurious in her ordinary habits, she could share in the hard field-life of the soldier with graceful cheerfulness. She had vigor, energy, tenacity of purpose, perfect and never failing self-possession, and indomitable courage. Few men of any party were able to resist her influence, when she chose to bring her varied charms to play upon them. Rut she was educated, from her childhood, in the most corrupt school and under the most profligate teachers of Europe. When she came back to her native land as the Queen of Scots ; she came as the instrument of those wTho had had the forming of her principles and character. She came for the double purpose of eradicating Protestantism from her own kingdom, and of keep- ing a door open through which France or Spain might at any time enter in to eject Elizabeth from her throne, and to re- establish Romanism in England. The story of her failure is too well known to need recital. It is enough to say that for a complication of the vilest crimes, she is disowned by her sub- jects ; her crown is transferred to the head of her infant son ; she flies from a Scottish prison only to find herself in an Eng- lish one, and which she was destined never to quit until she went to the scaffold to meet a bloody death.
That Elizabeth wras cognizant of Mary's relations, character,
2GA Eroudds History of England. [April,
and designs is beyond dispute, for she sent a fleet into the Xorth Sea to capture, or to sink if need be, the vessel in which Mary was conveyed from France to Scotland. She knew the grounds on which the Scottish people withdrew their alle- giance from Mary, the crimes with which she was charged, and she had in her own hands the damning evidences of guilt which Mary herself had furnished. Her wisest counsellors clearly saw that the interests of Protestant Scotland were bound up with those of Protestant England. Yet she refused to recognize the infant James YI., even while she kept his mother in prison. She insulted Murray, the greatest ruler, as well as one of the noblest men that Scotland ever produced, and whose memory is embalmed in the affections of Scotsmen as “the Good Regent.” She played fast and loose with all parties. She allowed Cecil to send cei’tain public instructions to her agents in Scotland, and then forwarded private ones her- self of an entirely opposite tenor. In not a few cases, when these personal instructions of her own were likely to bring her into trouble, she nnl-lushingly declared to the world that she had neither sent, nor sanctioned them in any manner what- ever. She hated Knox with a rancor, which was as short- sighted and unreasonable as it was intense. She was thus the instrument of inflicting upon Scotland years of untold misery. And therefore it is not wonderful that while Eng- lishmen have been accustomed to look upon Elizabeth as oue of their greatest sovereigns, Scotsmen have never learned to
admire her character or love her memorv.
** »
Mr. Froude has devoted a considerable space to a discussion of the question, whether Elizabeth was justified in bringing Mary to the scaffold. As a grand-daugliter of Henry VII. Mary’s claim to the crown of England, next after Elizabeth, no one could deny. In view of the doubts cast upon the le- gitimacy of Elizabeth’s birth, conscientious Catholics might have thought that Mary’s title was the strongest of the two. There can be no doubt, however, that on her were con- centrated the desires and hopes of the English Catholics. Mary was perfectly aware that such was the case ; she was plotting incessantly, and with great skill, now with France, now with Spain, and long before her own execution, she had been
1S69.]
Fronde's History of England.
2G5
the means of bringing not a few of the great English nobles to the block. If she had been a subject of Elizabeth, beyond all question, she had made herself liable to the penalties affixed to treason. But she was not an English subject. She claimed to be the Queen of Scots. Elizabeth had recognized her title and had pretended that her person was therefore sacred, when the Scottish people demanded that she should be yielded up to them, for trial on a charge of the highest crimes of which a human being can be guilty. All that could be said against her while in her English prison-house, was that she had stirred up others to plot rebellion, but in Scotland she had been per- sonally engaged in the perpetration of the foulest deeds. If her person was too sacred to be dealt with by the Scottish nation for such deeds, Elizabeth surely could have no legal or moral right to deal with her crimes of inferior dye.
We have already stated that throughout these volumes Mr. Froude manifests a warm sympathy with the cause of the Reformation. This did not astonish us, but we must confess to some surprise that he, an Anglican and an Oxonian, should have formed so high and yet so just an estimate of the character of some British reformers, on whom Anglicans and Oxonians have been long in the habit of looking down as wild fanatics. No Scottish Presbyterian ever penned a more admirable por- trait of John Knox, than that which we find on the pages of Mr. Froude. Indeed, we do not know where one can be found to match it, and we cannot close this article better, than by giving to our readers this exquisite picture.
“ ‘ There lies one,’ said the Earl of Morton, as he stood to watch the coffin of the Reformer lowered into the grave, — ‘ there lies one who never feared the face of mortal man.’ Morton spoke only of what he knew, the full measure of Knox’s greatness neither he, nor any man could then estimate. It is as we look back over that stormy time, and weigh the actors in it one against the other, that he stands out in his full proportions. No grander figure can be found, in the entire his- tory of the Reformation in this island, than that of Knox. Cromwell and Burghley (Cecil) rank beside him for the work which they effected, but as politicians and statesmen, they had to labor with instruments which they soiled their hands in
266
Fronde's History of England. [April,
touching. In purity, in uprightness, in courage, truth, and stainless honor, the Regent Murray and our English Latimer were perhaps his equals, hut Murray was intellectually far below him, and the sphere of Latimer’s influence was on a smaller scale. The time has come when English history may do justice to one but for whom the Reformation would have been overthrown among ourselves ; for the spirit which Knox created saved Scotland; and if Scotland had been Catholic again, neither the wisdom of Elizabeth’s ministers, nor the teaching of her bishops, nor her own chicaneries would would have preserved England from revolution. Ilis was the voice which taught the peasant of the Lothians that he was a free man, the equal in the sight of God with the proudest peer or prelate that had trampled on his forefathers. He was the one antagonist whom Mary Stuart could not soften, nor Mait- land deceive; he it was that raised the poor commons of his country into a stern and rugged people, who might be narrow, hard, superstitious, fanatical, but who nevertheless, were men whom neither king, nor noble, nor priest could force again to submit to tyranny. And bis reward has been the ingratitude of those who should most have done honor to his memory.
“ The change of times has brought with it the toleration which Knox denounced, and has established the compromises which Knox most feared and abhorred, and he has been described as a raving demagogue, an enemy of authority, a destroyer of holy things, a wild and furious bigot. But the Papists whom Knox grappled with, and overthrew, — the Papists of Philip II., Mary Tudor, and Pius V., were not the mild, forbearing innocents, into which the success of the Reformation has trans- formed the modern Catholics. But the men who took from Popery its power to oppress, alone made its presence again endurable; and only a sentimental ignorance, or deliberate misrepresentation of the history of the sixteenth century can sustain the pretence that there was no true need of a harder and firmer hand. The reaction when the work was done, a romantic sympathy with the Stuarts, and the shallow liberal- ism which calls itself historical philosophy, has painted over the true Knox with the figure of a maniac. Even his very bones have been flung out of their resting-place, or none can
1S69.]
Disestablishment.
267
tell where they are laid ; and yet hut for him Mary Stuart would have bent Scotland to her purpose, and Scotland would have been the lever with which France and Spain would have worked on England. But for Knox and Burghley — those two, but not one without the other — Elizabeth would have been flung from off her throne, or gone back into the Egypt to which she was too often casting wistful eyes.”
Art. VII. — Disestablishment.
“The Church is in danger!” No better rallying cry than this had ever been raised in Great Britain. It had gone home to the hearts of many on whom no other consideration had much influence. Religious people who saw no possible dis- tinction between “ the Church ” and the Christian religion had their deepest sympathies awakened. Conservative politicians who looked on any innovation as destruction, and any reform as “ the beginning of the end ” took alarm at any threat to an institution', that buttressed the throne. Everybody that had a relative in the Church — which category includes a fair propor- tion of the middle and upper classes, and especially every one who had a connection expectant of promotion— took alarm. Interested party-leaders found in this a cheap and easy way of conciliating the religious portion of the community, as the no- bles of the middle ages atoned for their contempt of every Christian precept by harrying the Jews and fighting the infi- dels. All who believed Episcopacy the only religion for a gentleman ; all who thought with the Stuarts, “no bidiop, no king all who considered a “ lord spiritual ” the only proper person to instruct a “lord temporal,” took up the cry, passed it on to numerous and eager dependents, and covered their opponents with the reproach of being enemies of Christianity, i. e., “ the Church.”
This cry now sounds from the Land’s End to Carlisle, and is pealed with redoubled earnestness in Ireland, where relig- ion has ever been a bone of contention since Brown became Protestant archbishop, and head of a Protestant garrison in
268
Disestablishment.
[April,
Ireland, wliose safety and dignity depended on holding the island for England. We propose to consider in this article the position and prospects of Protestantism in Ireland in view especially of that disestablishment which appears likely to be tried there in the first instance; and which justly attracts at this moment the interested observation of Christians through- out the world.
It is not necessary to reflect upon our ancestors for lacking the knowledge we have derived from the observation and ex- perience of three centuries. When Henry II. received Ireland as a gift from the Pope, the condition was that he should bring the island into subjection to the Papacy, of which it had till then maintained its independence, though Popish doctrine had of course leavened the Church. AYhen Henry VIII. set about reformation in Ireland, he and his advisers knew of no other policy than that tried in England, namely, to set up a Protest- ant hierarchy instead of a Romish, and by act of parliament to sustain and as far as possible enforce the authority of these spiritual rulers. With a partial sympathy on the part of the people of England with this general policy, partial success attended the attempt. But in Ireland — where the mass of the people spoke and worshipped in another tongue, received no instruction in the principles of Protestantism, and only came in contact, as a general thing, with the agents of the new re- ligious system as legal administrators, tax-gatherers, and alien representatives of a foreign power — the system always worked uneasily and with much friction. The people were, to begin with, demoralized to the last degree, under a clergy extremely devoted to the Pope and extremely ignorant, dissolute, and shameless. Among the slender services rendered to Ireland by Protestantism, one has been that it acted on Romanism and compelled it in self-defence to become better than it had been for some centuries.
When Brown called upon the nobles and clergy to own Henry VIII. as head of the Church, his most vigorous oppo- nent was the Roman Catholic archbishop of Armagh, who aroused the local clergy, appealed to the mass of the people, and opened communication with the Pope. George Brown, an Englishman, by royal favor, archbishop of Dublin, call-
1869.]
Disestablishment.
269
ing a parliament of land-owners, and urging on them the English religion — and Cromer, the Irish archbishop, speaking to the people in their own tongue, the priests his agents in every parish, and the inspiration coming from Rome through him — that is the picture of Irish religion in May, 1536 : and with modifications of circumstances, and change of characters, but with the same spirit and the same principles, the struggle has proceeded ever since. “ lie who will not pass this act, as I do,” said Brown as he gave the first vote for acknowledging the king’s supremacy in religion, “ is no true subject of his majesty.” That sentiment has been the bane of Irish Episco- pacy ; has, as we shall see, divided and weakened Irish Protest- antism ; and its proclamation by Mr. D’Israeli in the late elec- tion struggle, has induced a larger and more influential section of Irish Presbyterians to enter the political arena than ever before. “ The royal supremacy,” said that brilliant tactician, varying the form but retaining the substance of the old sym- bol, “ is the stronghold of our religious freedom, and the nation must rally to its defence.” But Presbyterians recollect that it was at the shrine of the royal supremacy their religious freedom was well nigh stricken down, and they conclude that the ques- tion of establishment or disestablishment, endowment or dis- endowment, is now put upon a basis which precludes their neutrality; and in the recent elections Presbyterian ministers — against their own pecuniary interests, as it might appear — have been, in several instances, the vigorous and effective sup- porters of candidates who range themselves under Mr. Glad- stone’s banner.
For Presbyterians have something in common with their Episcopal neighbors in the matter of maintenance. Lands, churches, revenues of suppressed monasteries, and tithes con- stituted the endowments of the Episcopal Church. Bishops enjoyed incomes of sums varying from $100,000 downward, placing them in wealth alongside the most of the nobility. Their residences were known as “ palaces,” thus carrying out a mediaeval idea which church dignitaries have found in the language of the Psalm (xlv. 16), “Instead of thy fathers shall be thy children, whom thou mayest make princes in all the earth.” They were large land-holders, and wielded much
270
Disestablishment.
[Amir.,
local influence. The attaches of the cathedrals, such as deans and others, were also generally well provided for. Rectories were in many cases worth $8,000 to $10,000 or $15,000, and plurali- ties were not uncommon. On the other hand many “ livings ” did not deserve the name. Pluralities, non-residence, and extent of parishes necessitated another grade of clergy, namely “ cu- rates,” whose salary, paid by the rector, ranged from $600 per annum downward — sometimes very far downward. These men remain in this subordinate position for periods determined by their influence, connection, faculty for getting on, or the want of these things, some getting “a living” within a few years, some dying in middle life and old age in this subordi- nate position, and, unless by inheritance or marriage possessing private means, after enduring great hardships. The great ine- quality of distribution, rather than the amount of the revenues of the Establishment, has ever been a blot at which fair-minded men pointed, and which the popular eyes could see readily. In point of fact, if all the present revenues of the Episcopal Church were equally distributed, a very moderate income would be given to each clergyman. But ordinary practical men have not seen the benefits of the working clergy toiling in comparative poverty because a prize might one day reward them ; nor how they were compensated for their subordinate place, by the reflected glories of an archbishop.
The Protestant settlers in Ireland — for the native Irish who became Protestant are too few to be taken seriously into account — were Episcopalians or Presbyterians according to their country. They were mixed in the north, and where a parish contained most Presbyterians, the living was enjoyed by their minister. Conformists and Non-conformists were not yet definite parties. The first elected fellows of Trinity College were Scotch Presbyterians. The first two provosts were Non-conformists. So when (the Ulster nobles having re- belled against England and been put down) a million of acres were given to the favorites of James and by them colonized in great part by Scottish Presbyterians, Puritans from England and Presbyterians from Scotland officiated, and at one time an independent, comprehensive Irish Church appeared probable. The bishops, however, naturally regarded this with dislike, and
1869.]
Disestablishment.
271
found Laud a steady friend to their exclusive plans, and were able to inflict great hardships upon the obnoxious ministers, who had ultimately to leave. The period between 1641 and 1662 was one of varied fortunes, but of unvarying zeal on the part of the Scottish Christians to spread the truth in Ireland. The restoration of Charles II. was followed by the ejection and persecution of the Presbyterians and by a gloomy period of suffering on their part, which terminated when the ill-fated Stuarts — true despots — disappeared before William III. This monarch, animated by a liberal spirit toward Ireland and — far beyond most of his successors — toward the Roman Catholics, made a royal grant (hence called Iiegium Donum ) to the Presbyterian ministers then in the country, as a set-off against their ejection from the livings. This grant was divided among them ; increased by parliament ; modified from time to time by concert between the government and the synod ; and grew annually in amount with the growth of the Church ; but has never amounted to much above a quarter of a million of dollars annually. Until within a few years, it was less than the value of a couple of bishoprics. It was contingent upon an annual vote of the House of Commons ; and finally, its amount at present to every minister (with a bona fide congre- gation, certified by his Presbytery as having a church edifice, twelve families, and about three hundred dollars from them) is about six hundred dollars. This is the entire extent of the “Establishment” of the Irish Presbyterian Church, paltry in amount, but yet enough to commit her to the principle of Government support to the Church.
It may be proper to indicate the numbers and the condition of the people thus provided in whole or in part with the means of grace at the public expense. The great bulk of the land in Ireland is owned by Episcopalians. Many were put in posses- sion of it by the English government, many acquired it by their own efforts, many whose ancestors were Presbyterians are now Episcopalians. Their prospects of advancement in the army, the navy, or in politics depended, or seemed to depend, on their conformity. Education at the universities was not accessible to Hon-conformists ; and all social influences tended to drive the richer portion of the community into the Episco-
D isesiablish merit.
272
[April,
pal Church. Many, no doubt, honestly preferred its forms to any other. But however the materials composing the 600,000 adherents of Episcopacy were brought together, it is un- doubted that they are the titled, landed, and wealthy portion of the nation. This consideration has not been without its weight in the formation of public sentiment. An institution to give the poor religious teaching without cost to them, woiild, it was alleged, be intelligible ; but to supply the richest portion of the community thus, is monstrous. In vain has it been attempted to show that the land bore the burden of the Church, and the rich owners thus paid for it. This would have had some foundation if the landlord had paid the rent charge, as the “clergy reserves” were called; but in point of fact, he collected it from the tenant, in addition to the rent, and had a consideration for saving the clergyman from the odium of exacting it, say from unwilling Roman Catholics.
The 525,000 Presbyterians of the last census are not the wealthy, but neitherare they the poorest of the people. Mainly settled in the province of Ulster, engaged in farming, manu- facturing, and trading, they contributed a safe, industrious, and thrifty middle class, with few paupers, and few criminals. To the frequent complimentary allusions made by themselves and their friends to their social virtues, independence, and com- fort, it was easy enough to retort, “Why don’t they support their own religion ?” That they could show an equivalent for all they received in the form of saving taxation, police, and other public charges, was not a sufficient rejoinder. “ Men are not paid for keeping the laws, and getting rich. This virtue is its own reward.” So Roman Catholic, and in many instances Protestants argued, the “ liberals ” both in Great Britain and Ireland denouncing the religious grants in Ire- land in the most vehement terms. Irish grievances, it may be well supposed, became familiar in the House of Commons, where 105 members, many of them Roman Catholic, have seats, lieyium Donum being the subject of an annual vote, was also the subject of annual debate, and usually encoun- tered strong opposition from the English “ Voluntaries,” as the Protestant foes of endowment are called. On these occasions
1869.]
D isesta blis/i ment.
273
a few Episcopalian members from Ulster usually claimed con- siderable honor for defending the Presbyterian grant, and hardly ever failed to adduce their services as a good reason why Presbyterians should not take any pains to be represented but by them. It was also frequently and mildly intimated, that defence of the grant should secure the Presbyterian mainten- ance ot the Establishment as it stood.
The question is an old one — what denomination made way under this state of things ? It is difficult to say with certainty, for the religious statistics of two centuries back are neither full nor reliable. Episcopalians had all the encouragement of government patronage, and all the sta- bility of real estate ; but their relative increase has been trifling. If the same remark is true of Presbyterians, it is to be considered that their condition in life, hard- ships from oppressive government, and independence of char- acter induced them to emigrate in large numbers to this coun- try, Canada, and other British colonies. This movement be- gan in a systematic manner in 1720, and considering the contri- butions made to our land and to Canada, their number in Ireland is large indeed. The vitality of the denomination has been won- derful. Roman Catholics also have largely emigrated, their relative diminution in late years being due, in great part, to this cause, the change of religion not accounting for any ap- preciable portion of it. The four and a half millions of Ro- man Catholics, though vastly improved in education, comforts, and general condition during the last twenty years, still include the mass of poor, ill-fed, and ill-lodged people, and from these and orber causes furnish the mass of the criminal population of the country. “Farmers” by courtesy, dividing the seven acres they held among their sons ; cottiers ; laborers in cities ; and very poor trades-people compose a frightfully large proportion of the people, whose elevation can, under the most favorable circumstances, proceed but slowly, for whom the best government can do but little while they are so crowded together, and so little in sympathy with the ruling classes aud the government, and who seem to rise socially and mentally by finding homes in this western world, more rapidly than in any other way. With an eye on this mass of strug-
274 Disestablishment. [April,
gling humanity, scrambling for life, one can hardly help wonder- ing that the churches of the richer minority should alone re- ceive government aid.
The moral value of the endowed ministry must he taken into account in forming a candid estimate of the disestablish- ment movement now in progress. Nor can Ave, to be just and discriminating, take the ministers in the mass.
The earlier Episcopal ministers were the sons of the gentry ; and the gentry were for the most part soldiers in traditions, habits, and associations, ruling among a conquered but often recalcitrant people. The ecclesiastics Avere little distinguished from the other members of their families. The sports of the field and the pleasures of the table had too many charms for them to admit of their being quiet, hardworking, and ex- emplary clergymen upon the present standard. Until near the close of the last century Irish Episcopacy had no hold on the public mind through the virtues of its ministry. Since that time a happy change has taken place, and as a body the Epis- copal clergy of Ireland are now inferior in moral character, education, and spiritual worth to none. In preaching power, they are behind the non-con forming ministry. In some forms of culture they are in advance of them. Many kindly offices are performed by them among the people around them ; and hence it has been common to say that the Establishment gave the country the benefit of a well-disposed local gentry Avhere in too many cases the great land-holders were absentees. To this, however, the political economists ruthlessly reply — Flan- nels for poor old people, soups and preserves for the sick, and a good word for Jane avIio is taken into the “rectory” and trained to be a cook or housemaid — these are all kindly helps to the poor, such as a resident gentry should render ; but where is the country but ours that maintains such a local gen- try at the public expense ? As to instructing or elevating in any direct way the mass of the people — the thing has nev- er been even attempted upon any feasible plan. Here and there for fifty years past a zealous clergyman has bad “ a course ” of controversial sermons, created a little local irri- tation, disturbed the faith of isolated individuals or fami- lies, A\ho in many cases sought more freedom and comfort in
1S69.]
Disestablishment.
America ; but no considerable inroad has ever been made on tlie Roman Catholic population, and in many instances Protestants, from intermarriages, neighborly associations, and ministerial neglect fell into Romisli ways. Between the Epis- copal clergymen, in many instances, and ,tlie Roman Catholic tithe-payers was a great gulf fixed. One spoke (and felt) English, the other, Irish. The poor Romanist possibly ad- mitted the goodness of the parson as “ a tine gentleman and good to the poor but he never thought of accepting or even commending him as a clergyman. He might even let the par- son talk to him on religion — though this has been exceptional — when he meant to drive a bargain with the rector for the grass of a field, or to get his good word with the squire in some small enterprise in which he or some one of his usu- ally large connection had a direct interest, and he knew that the parson dined with the-squire. But, as a general thing, the native population are without any sympathy with the clergy, aud of late years, owing to a variety of causes into which we do not here enter, the chasm has widened rather than otherwise.
Over their own people the influence of the Presbyterian clergy has been immense and excellent. The preaching has been to them as newspaper and library ; for till lately they read little^ except indeed such savory old books as Rutherford’s, Boston’s, and Willison’s. On the whole the Presbyterian ministers were a more blameless set of men than their Protestant brethren during the 17th and 18th centuries. Presbyterianism was planted in Ireland in the midst of revivals, and though religion and morals were both low, even among the clergy ? in the latter part of the last century, discipline was tolerably firm, and the Presbyterian minister in general was regarded as a sound, unobtrusive, good man, uot always very cultivated, but living in the affections of his people, rarely rich, but where* as often enough happened, conspicuously “ able, ” regarded with enthusiastic admiration by his co-religionists. When the Rev. Charles W olfe, a poet of no mean order, had attracted atten- tion in a Presbyterian neighborhood, the common sentiment was expressed by saying, that though a curate he preached as well as “ a meeting minister.” Little or no intercourse took place between this body of men and the Roman Catholics, who VOL. xli. — NO. II. 98
276
Disestablishment.
[Apeii.,
consider Presbyterians as double-dyed heretics, without bish- ops, or saints’ days, or vestments, or sponsors, or any of those “properties” common to the priest of the Anglican and of the Romish form. Until within a recent period the Roman Catholic element amounted to little in the northern province, where especially the Presbyterians lived, and the recent increase there is due almost entirely to the growth of manufactories rendering them needful as “ hands.” It will appear, probably, on a careful and candid review, that no form of good influence is likely to he lost to these bodies of clergymen by their disestablishment ; while, on the other, it seems likely enough that even in this point of view something may be acquired.
What forces have been arrayed against the Establishment in Ireland? To begin at the centre, as a Church the Episco- pal has not had firm hold on the mind of many of its own adherents. Social and other bonds held them to it as a cor- poration, and conscience held many of them to its principles and modes of worship ; hut as a Church it had little hold on many of its people. Occasional arbitrary appointments by the bishop, when a man “ with interest ” stepped over the head of a curate long known and loved in the parish ; glaring nepotism now and then occurring ; occasional friction between leading men in the churches and the clergy ; the offensive display of clerical independence of the people ; the painful feeling of im- potence, if a “ parson ” were ineffective, loose in doctrine or in life ; these and other similar causes chilled the attachment of Episcopalians. As they became aware of the existence and effi- cient working of other systems of late years, a process of disin- tegration has gone on in many places, the earnest and devout rushing off to pronounced forms of dissent.
Outside, and among Presbyterians, other influences have been at work. A large and influential portion of this denomi- nation, with the late Dr. Cooke at its head, sustained the existing state of things, admitted the claim of the Establish- ment to be the breakwater against Romanism, and frowned upon any self-assertion on the part of Presbyterianism in social and political movements. This party, however, has not held its ground ; and while divergent view's on details may he found in the body, it will he found probably that the new situation
1869.]
Disestablishment.
277
will be accepted by not only a numerical majority, but by those most considerable for vigor, energy, and practical Christian ac- tivity. With the rapid progress of liberal thought during the last thirty years, many questions have been asked of which the answers are against the existing condition of things. Why should Mrs. Jones, in virtue of driving to the parish church, be socially better then Mrs. Brown who attended the Presbyterian minister, and heard confessedly better sermons ? Why, when a benevolent society held its meeting on the neutral ground of the village court-house, should the old and venerable Presby- terian minister be expected to know his place, while a fledgling of a curate took the chair, ex officio f Why should the man whose irregular living excluded him from ordinances in the Presbyterian, be admitted into the Episcopal Church, and if of any social consideration be made a churchwarden the next year ? Why should a man be thought ill-conditioned, because “ a Dissenter,” and be socially tabooed, so that for any public office, even so small as that of dispensary doctor or village postmaster, his Episcopal rival had a great advantage over him ? Why should a man be thought unquestionably loyal who “went to church,” and another equally good, very doubtful, who “ went to meeting ” ? Is it, as has been industriously cir- culated and propagated since the days of George Brown, and firmly believed in the reign of Elizabeth, that the man who does not accept th spriest that the state provides, is not true to the king it acknowledges ? And if so — many men have been concluded — the state had better not choose the priest, nor at- tempt to govern too much in the department of religion. It' so, this “ branch of the civil service ” as an irreverent legis- lator called it, had better be improved away altogether. Let us as ministers rely on the consciences of the people ; let us as Christian people choose our ministers and support them.
Undoubtedly also the experience of the Free Church of Scot- land, of the United Presbyterian Church, and in part of the United States has been studied with effect in this connection.*
* ODe of the most memorable conflicts in Ulster was a viva voce discussion in Belfast between Dr. Cooke and Dr. Ritchie, a Presbyterian voluntary from Scot- land, in which the ability and debating power of Dr. Cooke gave him an easy victory. His best points were founded on the working of “Voluntaryism ” in
278
Disestablishment.
[Apkil.
For the Free Church of Scotland, with its work thrown on it ab- ruptly, with schools, manses, and churches to build, has secured an income for the bulk of its clergy as large as the Irish Church funds if equally divided would give the Irish Epis- copal ministry ; and it has secured a fair minimum support for the pastors of its poorest districts.
Wesleyans formerly owned a kind of undefined dependence on the Establishment ; were married and sometimes buried by its ministers, to whom they would not look as means of con- version, comfort, or sanctification, were obsequious to “clergy- men ” whom they would not hear. They eschewed the term “Dissenter,” and voted “solid” on the Tory side, but as far as the Establishment is a church, they showed their respect for it by the distance they kept from it. Both in England and Ire- land (with the exception of an inconsiderable and diminish- ing Irish section) this attitude is being abandoned, and Metho- dism not only turns a deaf ear to the Episcopal charmer who invites her to union, i. e ., absorption, but actuallywentures to rebuke the apostasy of the Establishment.
Unquestionably the result of disestablishment in Canada has bad its influence in the mother country. The Westmin- ster Review and other organs of public opinion have persistent- ly pointed to the pacific and healing character of that measure in a community composed of opposite religious and different nationalities. Lord Monck, whose position as governor gave him opportunity to watch the influence of the measure, and who is a Protestant, may be taken as a type of the thoughtful men of the liberal party. IBs lordship lately told the Ltouse of Lords: —
“ He did Dot desire to fight under false colors. He admitted that, independent- ly of the special circumstances of the Irish Church, he was, on principle and as a Churchman, opposed to all connection between Church and Stale. He believed that wherever that connection existed, the same blighting and beuumbing influence would be found to affect the Church. Holding these views, lie did not share in the gloomy forebodings of those who thought the Irish Church could not survive
America, the number of unemployed ministers, ill-paid ministers, and vacant churches being set out, without any regard to explanatory circumstances, and without any reference to the condition of the country. It is gratifying to leel that the basis of an argument for a state church founded ou such facts as these is gradually melting away.
1869.]
I) Isesta llish merit.
279
its severance from the civil power, for the experience he had had in Canada of the beneficial effect on the Church of throwing her upon her own resources pre- cluded him from entertaining such apprehensions.”
The persistent and systematic efforts of the English “ liber- als” have done much to modify public feeling, though the progress of Ritualism has possibly done still more. To the public mind it has again and again been suggested, that if the Bishop of Exeter or of Oxford depended on the moral and material support of the people, he could not have held his place for public mischief for two years. As it is, he is a prince of the church and a peer of the realm, with an income as secure and as great as a nobleman’s, whom (since a process like a chancery-suit only can remove one of “ the inferior clergy”) it would require a revolution or a civil war to displace.
These and other influences like these have been at work to weaken the hold the Establishment has had on the public mind, and these it will be seen are entirely independent of that hostility of the Roman Catholic mind, to which it is sometimes supposed the disendowment of Protestantism is only a peace-offering.
The hold of Presbyterians on the Regium Donum has been relaxed by a different set of causes. It frequently tran- spired that the people — especially small farmers and traders to whom a fixed income of £70 sterling, or four hundred dol- lars, a year seemed a “ nice little thing,” relieved their minds of obligation to pay their minister by reference to this govern- ment provision. The self-reliant and successful proceedings of the Scottish churches suggested to reflecting people that their example might be followed with advantage to all parties. But probably nothing has so much contributed to produce this result as a recent and persistent agitation for the increase of the grant. The government seem to have amused the appli- cants with gracious promises contingent upon conditions known to be impossible. Country brethren were told in the blandest tones of Cabinet ministers — “ We shall be delighted to have your means doubled, and shall propose it to the Cabi- net, and if there appears ground to, think parliament will approve, it shall be done, gentlemen. Delighted to see you, gentlemen ; good morning !” The courteous and honorable
2S0
Disestablishment.
[April,
gentleman knew probably that parliament entertained entire- ly opposite designs ; but when everybody was pleased, why make enemies to one’s administration bv disagreeable truths ? Meantime many ministers regretted this application as a widen- ing of the breach with the great non-established churches; as betraying distrust of the people; as repressing the rising tide ot liberality ; as involuntarily upholding things as they are in relation to Episcopacy and Romanism — a regret in which they had the sympathy of many of the people. Thus it came about that well meant, but mistaken, efforts for the increase have actually prepared in a variety of ways for the abandonment of Regium Donum .
For it is not to be imagined that Mr. Gladstone for party purposes initiates assaults on this institution. In 1833 the “ Church Temporalities Act ” passed the House of Commons. By this the church revenues of £S00,000 sterling were taxed from live to fifteen per cent., except where the livings Avere under £200 sterling. By this act ten bishoprics Avere lopped off, and slices cut fiom the salaries of the Primate and another bishop. Several offensive imposts for church purposes were also abolished. Having declared its power o\rer all national insti- tutions, parliament has been fettered by no traditional regard to the sacredness of “ the Church.” In 1835, by a majority of 285 against 258, Lord John Russell’s motion was carried, to the effect that after providing for the instruction of Episco- palians the surplus of church revenues should be laid out for the benefit of all classes of Christians ; and that thus only the tithe contest could be settled. Sir Robert Peel thereon re- signed ; but Lord Melbourne's measures founded on the fore- going resolution were rejected by the Lords. In ISIS Lord Macaulay made his notable declaration on the subject. In 1856 a committee of inquiry Avas moved for. This attempt was renewed in 1863, and Mr. Gladstone owned to Sir Roun- dell Palmer his inability to defend the existing state of things, or much longer to blink the question. Great authorities, like the late Archbishop Whately and Dr. Arnold, confessed the unsat- isfactory state of matters. Lord Derby acquiesced in a sugges- tion in the direction of “levelling up,” and so satisfying the existing discontent. Lord Dufferin, on a public occasion,
1869.]
Disestablishment.
2S1
raised tlie alternative of “levelling down.” The son of the Tory premier, Lord Stanley, told a great meeting of conserva- tives at Bristol, in October, 1867, that the Irish Church ques- tion was “ the question of the day.” Lord Mayo, the Irish Secretary of Mr. D’Israeli, agreed with his chief in saying that great changes must be made ; but with a certain vagueness of statement, their plans always looked in the direction of endow- ing all parties and so making, if possible, a well-fed happy fam- ilv out of mutually hostile factions. These historical circum- stances vindicate the present government against the imputa- tion of forcing this question into notice for political ends. All admit the need of something being done. Mr. Gladstone’s opponents favored the idea of appeasing the Irish malcon- tents by putting them all in the government ship. The pres- ent administration would reach the same result by leaving each party to build its own boat. Yet we shall, no doubt, hear much, as we have heard much already, of the betrayal of Protestant interests by the present premier.
These facts also serve to show that patience may he tried before legislation on this point reaches a satisfactory con- clusion. The management of even a large majority is not an easy task to a man like Mr. Gladstone; the elements compos- ing it are of every variety of opinion, from Jews and Roman Catholics up to intelligent Episcopalians. The leader of the opposition is cool, wily, experienced as a tactician, not over scrupulous, and backed by a stolid English feeling that some- how it is good to support “the Church.” “You keep the Sabbath here as well as at home, I hope,” the present writer said to a woman from whom he bought some paper, and whose accent betrayed her English origin. “ Oh, yes, I always go to church in the morning. One has a comfortable sense of hav- ing done one’s duty.” So multitudes of people feel. Land- lords will be threatened with the unsettlernent of their titles, and the Protestantism of the country with the triumphs of Popery. The feelings of the Queen are supposed to be against disestablishment, and the number of people having a personal or pecuniary interest in the Church is very large. All these will oppose, just as a corresponding party would oppose the abolition of a standing army. The consideration of these cir-
282
Disestablishment.
[Apkil,
cumstances may well moderate any sanguine expectations of seeing disestablishment as an accomplished fact for some time to come. Thank God for a House of Lords,” has become as much a devotional formula, as if it were in the .Book of Com- mon Prayer, and something of delay and difficulty may be apprehended from the proverbial obstructiveness of that digni- fied body.
It only remains to indicate the probable results of the measure as it has assumed shape in the proposal of Mr. Glad- stone. All parties in Ireland are called upon to give up something — Episcopalians their church property, to the capitalized value of sixteen and a half millions sterling ; Pres- byterians their annual endowment of about £40,000 sterling, and Roman Catholics their endowment of Maynooth of some- thing over £30,000 sterling. The bishops’ courts and all ecclesiastical jurisdiction will disappear, and ecclesiastical cor- porations be dissolved. From the 1st January, 1871, when the bill is to take effect (if it become law), all clergy in good standing are to receive annuities, terminating variously ; and to new appointments by the independent organizations are to be attached such salaries as the churches respectively making them deem proper and provide. The Roman Catholic and Presbyterian colleges are to have a like settlement of all claims. Trinity College is to await future legislation — “ Proximus Ucalejon ardet Private endowments are not touched ; royal authority will create no more officers or offices, but will recognize them when created ; and of course the bishops cease to be spiritual peers and to sit in the House of Lords. Mrs. Brown and Mrs. Jones go to meeting and church as before, but the government puts no more dignity on the one than the other, and the youthful curate of the parish and the Presbyterian minister take rank and precedence according to what they are and the people they represent. No man, who has not lived in Ireland can properly estimate the number and variety of novelties this measure will intro- duce, in the way of liberty and equality, and this while mak- ing no account of the purposes to which the eight and a halt millions (remaining after compensation to the amount ot £8,000,000 has been given), shall be applied as in hospitals,
1869.]
Disestablishment.
283
asylums, and other benevolent institutions outside the depart- ment of religion. Ireland has been so long in a peculiar con- dition, the Episcopal portion of the population has so long been accustomed to precedence and place, that they have insensibly come to be regarded as natural and inalienable rights. Romanism has so long been the one recognized enemy, for a defence against which any thing, however rotten or worthless in itself, became of value, that we can we’l conceive the dismay — almost the paralysis of terror — with which many will stand aghast at this revolution. It will seem to them much the same as if Antonelli had been asked by the Queen in council to be good enough to come and live in Dublin Castle, and manage Ireland generally in concert with Cardinal Cullen.
It is gratifying, however, to know that some of the clergy are not alarmed at the prospect but prepared to expect good from it. Just because they are exceptional — “rari nantes in gurgite vasto” — we refer with pleasure to such men as Dr. Trench, an earnest revival clergyman and a cousin of the archbishop; to the Dean of Elphin, and to the Rev. Win. Mdlwaine, who expects in return for disendowment “ a free church, synodical self-control, a voice and a choice for both clergy and people in the election of their bishops and digni- taries.” That any bishops have applauded their own immo- lation as peers we have not yet ascertained, but their recent rebuff by the government in promptly and curtly refusing them leave to meet in convocation might well reconcile them to exclusion from the place of judge and divider in the House of Lords.
And how, in point of fact, is Protestantism likely to .hold its ground if the changes proposed by Mr. Gladstone’s bill should in substance become law ? This is the question that will naturally and most eagerly be asked by the friends of truth. The answer to this — founded upon tolerable knowl- edge of the existing condition of things, and some acquaint- ance with the history of the past, must be our concluding topic.
The earliest result of disestablishment will be to give the lay members of the Establishment more Dower in church
284
Disestablish men t.
[April,
affairs. When they directly support their pastors, they will claim and obtain a voice in the choice of them. There is nothing in the Episcopal government essentially opposed to this, as the experience of the system in the United States shows. Even in Ireland the most popular and useful churches in the cities have been those known as “ free,” that is as built by private benevolence, unendowed, and managed by trustees. The trustees having no means of paying a minister but by pew rents, invariably selected effective and earnest preachers. The man who has for forty years justly held the first place among Episcopal preachers in Ireland. Dr. Gregg, now bishop of Cork, occupied one of these “free” churches for thirty years. The extension of such a system as this will render the tie between ministers and people stronger, and will secure closer pastoral supervision. So far there can be no real diffi- culty in the cities and towns. A strong point has always been made for the existing state of things, founded on the extreme- ly sparse population holding the Protestant faith in the west- ern and southern portions of the island. In many instances a dozen Protestant families compose a congregation. Must they be left to perish in the wilderness '! Certainly there is no need that they should. For, in the first instance, it often enough happens that these families include the largest landed proprie- tors in the district. If such people lapse into apathy or “go to Pome ” because the public funds no longer provide them a clergy, there is no more to be said. One half the effort made, for example, by the small bodies of Wesleyans will sustain a ministry among them, and the exceptional localities where there is no wealth, may well enough be provided for, as the Highlands and Islands of Scotland have been provided for by the Free Church, on the principle that the strong should help the weak. The Irish Episcopal Church contains many ad- mirable ministers and devoted Christ-loving people. They do not themselves know how much they have learned to under- rate their strength, and how much they can do when they are shut up to it. They have been like a mismanaged hypochon- driac sedulously doctored and guarded till personal effort has appeared an impossibility, and the withdrawal of these atten- tions has threatened immediate dissolution. When the patient
Disestablishment.
2S 5
I860.]
is thrown off, puts his feet to the ground and his hands to work, and finds he does not die, confidence is regained, and by and by he wonders that he ever doubted his own powers. So, we are persuaded, Irish Protestants will in twenty years remem- ber with astonishment the cowardice that suggested despair, in view' of disendowment. They will be stronger, more united, more self-respecting, and greatly more tolerant of their brethren, when factitious distinctions no longer prevail. There is no more difficulty in providing for bishops and other officers of the Church then is experienced in America, and it will prob- ably be found that if diminished revenues impair the orna- mental, they will add to the useful, in the Episcopate.
It must be admitted, indeed, that for some time the Episcopa- lians will have special difficulty from the circumstance that pe- cuniary liberality has not been cultivated among them. They thus pay the penalty of past indulgence. The pampered cat will not get on so well for a little time as her leaner neighbor that has had to live by effort. Indeed, a kind of poetical jus- tice is likely to be done. It was a not uncommon and most mis- guided policy to say in form or substance to Protestants outside the Establishment — “Where is the use of your paying for pews in the meeting-house when you can have them in the church for nothing ?” There are some in every community to whom such an appeal is not made in vain. It will require some spe- cial education to bring up adherents thus won to a sense of re- sponsibility. In another form also the follies of the past will avenge themselves. The Episcopal clergy counted upon the social prestige of the Establishment as a substitute for moral or spiritual service. Some members of a family drop into the Preslyterian minister’s service, like w'hat they hear, become frequent attendants, and are “ conspicuous by their absence ” from the parish church. A zealous neighbor informs the rector, and gets a promise that the thing shall receive atten- tion. Next time the good man meets his Mentor he says,
“ That thing is made all right; Mrs. (the Rector’s wife,
namely), “ called on the young ladies in the carriage, and they will be regular at church in future.” This is not an imasdn- ary case. One does not need to weep over the loss of ecclesias- tical weapons like this — so entirely unknown to the primitive Church.
2SG
I) isestablish men t.
[April,
Nor is it improbable that the Church will stand much bet- ter with the general population when no longer identified with compulsory payments for its maintenance. It is shrewd- ly conjectured that Romish priests do not go into ecstasies over the change in prospect. They probably foresee that one deformity, which all their parishioners could perceive, will thus be removed from Protestantism, as one grievance will be taken from the list of those agitators who, like Iago, are “ nothing if not critical.'’ There are no doubt many people in every community not strongly attached to their ancestral faith, as a religion, but who will chivalrously cling to it when it is under the ban, and shrink from the suspicion of being won to its rival by adventitious advantages. Not only has religion not died out in America for lack of an Establishment, but it is just here that more Irish Roman Catholics have embraced Protestantism within fifty years than in the three centuries of the regime of the Establishment in Ireland itself. It would not be strange if the Roman Catholic priests anticipated mixed re- sults from Mr. Gladstone’s measure.
It must further be taken into account that the self-support- ing plan will come on so gradually as to admit of timely and adequate arrangements for the new state of things. And as the money saved after compensation and annuities will be laid out on non-sectarian charities, considerable sums of money will be set free for church purposes. Taking all these circum- stances into account, the most anxious friends of the Episcopal form in Ireland need not give way to despondency. The fault will be the Church’s if she be not able to hold her ground for all the purposes of good for which a Church is or- ganized ; and her independence will remove a prominent blot from the page not only of British legislation, but also of Brit- ish Protestantism. For it is impossible to deny that if the conditions of Ireland and England could be supposed reversed and the Roman Catholic minority in the latter endowed at the cost mainly of the Protestant majority, with seats in the Lords for the Roman Catholic prelates, the spirit of Englishmen must become something very different from what it is, to make that arrangement satisfactory.
There is just one point of view in which the Irish Episco-
1869.]
Disestallis/i m ent.
287
palian may look with apprehension upon the future of his Church, especially in the matter of its higher officers. It is well known that a great majority of the Scottish nobility and gentry are Episcopalian and that they have a fully organized hierarchy in Scotland. The old and general custom of sending the higher Scottish youth to English universities ; the close union between England and Scotland ; the natural operation of the arrangement by which “ religion ” in the army and navy meant Episcopacy ; and the legal necessity so long main, tained for conformity to the Prelatic Church in order to em- ployment under the crown ; with the inherent recommenda- tions of Episcopal forms to a certain order of mind; all these contributed to this result — a result which is greatly to the detriment of the nation.*
Now it may be alleged with some show of reason— “ We have the landed proprietors in Scotland committed to Episco- pacy, and yet the worst-paid clergy in Scotland are the Epis- copal clergy, and even the bishops have never yet reached the incomes of many of the clergy of the unendowed Scottish churches.” We admit the facts, and that in part they hear this construction. But it is to be borne in mind that Scottish Episcopacy has never been as evangelical as Irish ; that it has suffered from the want of a popular element ; and that it has depended upon an aristocracy all too apt to think that their profession of a religious faith is so distinguished an honor thereto, that material aid is a supplement which it is entirely too much to expect. If therefore Irish Episcopalians are to look to the condition of their brethren in Scotland, let it be as a warning rather than as a discouragement. Let them beware of the influences that have been at work in Scotland, and cultivate the courage that will throw itself fearlessly on the heart and conscience of the mass of a people instructed in the truth. A squire who discharges his duties to “ the par- son” by asking him to dinner, and a present of game, is of no more account, as far as his soul is concerned, than the man
* For not to speak of the individuals who, like the Marquis of Bute, have con- veyed themselves and their means over to Rome by the incliued plane of Scottish prelacy, the nobles have thus been divided oft' from the sympathies of the Scottish people, and the national life has been so far weakened.
2S8
Disestablishment.
[April,
who preserved or shot the game ; and the “ parson ” who teaches the people of the parish the truth and lives it out before them will find in them a more reliable and uenerous source of support than in the squire, just as one honest book- seller going to the people with an author’s book is better to the author than a titled Maecenas of the days of Milton or Dr Johnson.
The Irish Presbyterians are better prepared for disendowment than their neighbors, not only because they lose less, but because they have been cultivating perforce the habit of self-reliance. They have built their own places of worship, and the debt of some $100,000 upon them, they have now a young men’s asso- ciation organized to pay off. They have had a “manse” scheme in operation for some years, by which congregations of the poorer class have been aided from a central fund in erecting residences for their pastors — which constitute so much clear saving to the Church. They have been gathering congregations outside Ulster, which while small and feeble required support from the stronger ; and thus the mind of the people has been gradually educated to the idea of a common sustentation fund. The aged ministers, and the assistants not yet receiving Re- gium Donum are already provided for by a plan of this general character. The spirit of missions has been spreading through the Church, which begins to feel her strength. An immense majority of the active and spirited portion of the ministers and people look disendowment in the face, not only without fear but with exultant hope. To them it seems that patriotism requires this measure; that the Church will not lose but gain ; that religion going forth more nearly as in the days when silver and gold it had none, will possess more power, encounter fewer foes, attract fewer false friends, and be more fairly credited with any successes God may give it. A few perhaps have been stung by the arrogance and assump- tion of the more richly endowed dignitaries, and by the offen- sive exercise of power given by the law. In this circumstance there is a lesson for all men and all churches. Intolerance in time brings its own reward. An Episcopal churchyard is the rector's freehold. The people who pay the tithes may not bury their dead there without his permission ; and he can in-
1869.]
Disestablishment.
289
terdict any service at the grave. Recent use of these powers and similar ungracious acts have deprived the Establishment of sympathy it ought to have had, and proved in their results that intolerance is not only sin, it is folly. But apart from whatever merely human feeling has been thus evoked, there is a deep and unimpassioned conviction in the minds of Irish Presbyterians that the time has come for ceasing to depend on the state ; that wise, energetic, and well-considered mea- sures can be taken for raising all the money needed by the Church, and that her strength and God’s glory will be pro- moted by the effort. So earnest is this conviction, that an im- pression having gone abroad that a large sum was to be given by the government which would simply perpetuate endow- ment in another form, a crowded and enthusiastic meeting in Belfast uttered a formal and emphatic protest against it.
We do not mean to convey the idea that there are no dan- gers to be apprehended, and that prudence and caution maybe safely dispensed with. Romanism, though lately losing her well-won reputation for sagacity, is yet a wily foe, prompt to tui*n any change of affairs to denominational account. What is being done from a sense of justice, she will undoubtedly claim as a tribute to her power and influence. But men must “ be just and fear not.” The policy that has made mischief in Ireland has been the policy of yielding only when the concession to right lost all the moral value of a just and digni- fied measure. If any section of Irish Presbyterians — flushed with some political successes, and gratified by the humiliation of old and haughty opponents who ought to have been friends, allow themselves to be drawn from their safe and honorable ground of preachers of righteousness to the slippery soil of party politics, they will lose by this, and not gain. If also they allow themselves to think that as disendowment gives all churches a clear stage and no favor, per se the logical and scriptural arguments for Presbyterianism must carry the day, they will be betrayed into a disastrous mistake. Logic is only one of many forces operating on the human mind. Taste, moral character, tone, and other influences determine men’s choice among churches. Church arrangements — unlike the sacraments— derive their efficacy in great part “ from them
290
Recent Developments respecting
[April,
that do administer them.” But if they he able, earnest, hum- ble, devoted, holy men, preaching Christ and living Christ, it is undeniable that in the new state of things, they may prosecute their work with a degree of self-respect, withthe consciousness of a nearer resemblance to their brethren all over the world, and with, a higher hope of telling on the entire population than before. They occupy at this moment a vantage-ground of uncommon interest, and considering how many of the sons and daughters of American Presbyterianism are linked in closest ties with Ireland and her Presbyterian Zion, we cannot but look on with lively" concern, and with the hopeful, prayerful expecta- tion that the truth in her hands will be equal to the new strain put upon it, as it has been in many a previous crisis; and that as she goes out to light the battle of the Lord, the sling and stones of her simple, unencumbered, and hitherto victori- ous warfare will be more than a substitute for Saul’s armor which political exigencies conspire with her own convictions to take from off her limbs.
Art. Till. — Recent Developments respecting Presbyterian
Reun ion.
The original action of the Assembly of ’66, authoritatively initiating measures looking toward reunion, was in its nature tentative. It did not, and was not designed, to commit our Church to reunion, per fas aut nefas , or on any basis except that explicitly specified in the resolution itself, viz. : “ at the earliest time consistent with agreement in doctrine, order, and polity, on the basis of our common Standards , and the prev- alence of that mutual confidence and love which are neces- sary" to a happy union aud the permanent peace and prosperity of the united Church.” It appointed a committee “ to confer with a similar committee from the other branch in regard to the desirableness and practicability of reunion, and if after conference and inquiry , such reunion shall seem to be desi- rable and practicable, to suggest suitable measures for its ac complishment, and report to the next General Assembly.”
291
1869.] Presbyterian Peunion.
This speaks its own meaning. It utters no judgment of the Assembly that matters bad become ripe for reunion, but sim- ply a desire for such reunion as early as it shall appear that the two bodies are prepared for it, by agreement in doctrine, order, and polity, on the basis of our common Standards, and the prevalence of mutual confidence, &c. The committee were not instructed to negotiate terms of reunion, nor did the Assembly give encouragement that it would accept such terms irrespective of conformity to the foregoing conditions, but only in consistency with them; and all committees, conferen- ces and negotiations were ordered, first for the ascertainment of facts in the premises, and secondly for the settlement of terms of reunion conformably to the basis set forth, if facts should be found to warrant it, but not otherwise. For re- union on such a basis and state of facts the mind of our Church is nearly unanimous. The chief difference among us has had relation to the question, What are the facts ?
The successive stages and results of these conferences and negotiations are well known to our readers, and need no rep- etition here. The great point of difficulty and disagreement has been the doctrinal basis, even as doctrinal differences were the chief wedge which forced the original disruption. Many of the Old School desired to add to the simple Standards an explicit provision for the exclusion of certain dogmas con- demned b}7 the Assembly of 1837, which were the principal cause of division. The New School as persistently sought to provide, and in each proposed plan of union elaborated by the joint committee on reunion succeeded in providing, for the toleration of whatever had been tolerated in either body. This the Old School branch, however the excitement and tactics of the hour may have got it through Assemblies, has stead- fastly refused to sanction, when, after thorough discussion, it has been submitted for Presbyterial ratification. At the same time, as a body, they have not pressed the demand for the insertion of any formal addition to the Standards, explicitly outlawing the dogmas before referred to. But although not insisting on the express insertion of such a provision in the plan of union, they have by the positive and unanimous vote of the Assembly declared, and signified to the New VOL. xli. — no. xi. 99
292 Recent Developments respecting ' [April
School body, that they do not understand the doctrinal basis, even with the Gurley clause, which is now stricken out, as permitting the licensure or ordination of those who hold doc- trines that have been condemned by either Assembly. Waiv- ing the insertion of this, however, they insist on excluding all other additions to the Standards in the interest of latitudina- rianism, or for the protection of dogmas which the Standards, as administered by us, do not themselves protect. They neither ask nor accept any doctrinal basis but the Standards pure and simple, now alike adopted, if not alike administered by both bodies. The question then arises, will the New School consent to unite on this platform, i. e ., the platform of the joint committee cleared of the Smith and Gurley amendments ? Our history, and the negotiations, discussions, schemes of re- union and their end, have given them a pretty good oppor- tunity to lind out what we are. They know best what they themselves are. Still further, are they conscious of such an agreement with us in doctrine and polity, that they are ready to unite with us, on the simple basis, now much insisted on, of our common Standards, untrammelled by any other conditions or compacts in the premises ? If these parties cannot trust each other on this basis, many are beginning to say, they can- not trust each other in any. If they can, and are ready to trust each other on this platform, then, many claim they are ripe for reunion — not otherwise. So far as doctrine is concerned, the immense majority of our Presbyteries have signified their readiness and desire for reunion on this doctrinal basis and no other. What say our New School brethren ? Their committee on reunion have issued the following address to the Presby- teries of both Churches, which we give entire, both on account of its bearings on this great question, and for the sake of pre- serving, in permanent form, a document so important.
In pursuance of a resolution of the General Assembly, at its meeting at Harrisburg!), Pa., May, 1868, continuing the Committee on Reunion for the pur- pose of “ furnishing such information as they may deem best to the Churches, in order to secure intelligent action on the subject of reunion,” the said Committee met in the city of New York, on the 20th day of January, 1869.
It appeared from the best evidence that could be obtained, that, while a large proportion of the N. S. Presbyteries, acting on the overture sent down by both General Assemblies, had given their approval of the same, most of the 0. S.
1869.]
Presbyterian Reunion.
293
Presbyteries had given their approval only to an amended basis, for which their Assembly had expressed a preference in case the Assembly at Harris' burgh should concur; that is, to the basis of the overture, with the omission in the First Article of the following words: —
“ It being understood,” etc, — or as some of them have expressed their action, ‘‘the basis of the Standards pure and simple.”
It thus appeared, that, while on both sides there has been a very general ap- proval of reunion itself, a difference of action has prevailed which, as the case now stands, is likely to defeat what we believe is the earnest purpose of a very large majority of the members of both branches of our Church, to wit, the accomplish- ment of reunion at the meeting of the next General Assemblies.
That the other Assembly did not intend to make any alteration in the princi pies of the plan submitted by the Joint Committee, is clear from the fact that, having adopted that plan by a large majority, the amendment was proposed only as a matter of 11 preference,” subject to the concurrence of our General Assem- bly; and the reason given for the preference is, that, so amended, ‘-the basis would be more simple and more ^expressive of mutual confidence.” It appears from the statement of the Committee sent by the Assembly at Albany to report their action to the Assembly at Harrisburgh, that they were influenced in part also by the hope of reconciling opposing elements in their own body, and so se- curing in favor of reunion a greater unanimity.
Believing that the Presbyteries connected with us, and our branch of the Church generally, are disposed to make any concessions to their brethren of the other body not inconsistent with principle, and that express guaranties, both in regard to doctrine and polity, may be safely dispensed with, now that free dis- cussion of the subject has brought about so good an understanding, this Com- mittee deem it iheir duty in accordance with the purpose of their continuance, to call the a ention of the Presbyteries to the present posture of the case ; and, without assuming any authority, would recommend that, at a regular meeting, preceding the next General Assembly, they express their assent to the amend- ment referred to with the addit oaal one (which, to us, appears to carry with it all the reasons that apply to the other, aud is regarded by some as quite necessary in case the o;her is adopted), viz., the omission of the whole of the Tenth Arti- cle. We cannot but trust that our Old School brethren will concede this addi- tional oinissi u, since it i3 but the application of the same principle to the polity of the C i iron w i chtliey have applied to its doctrine; and, while it will serve to harmonize iiifering preferences among us, as theirs does among them, will be, equally wit i theirs, expressive of the same “ mutual confidence.”
Should tiie requisite number of Presbyteries, in both the bodies, agree to both these mod tientions, the two Assemblies may find themselves in a position to consumm ite the reuuion at the approaching meeting, and thus avoid the delay of another year, —which is much to be deprecated, — in order to frame and send down a new overture. It must, however, be well understood, that, by agreeing to the omissions in question, the Presbyteries do not relinquish nor deny the right to ah reasonable liberty in the statement of views, aud the interpretations of the Standards, as generally expressed in the First Article as it now stands ; and also that the interpretation of their own language by the Joint Committee in the preamble aud conclusion of their Report, May, 1868, is to be accepted as the true inlei pretation.
294 Recent Developments respecting [April,
With these views, and in order to prepare the way for definite and uniform action on the part of the Presbyteries, the Committee beg leave to submit the following form, not to supersede but to follow their previous action, in case they have already approved of the terms of the overture : —
“ This Presbytery, having already approved of the basis of reunion overtured by the last General Assembly, do now, in order to a final and harmonious adjust- ment of the whole case, consent to the amending of the basis, by the omission,
“ 1 st. Of that part of the First Article of the basis that begins with the words, h being understood ' Ac., and ends with the words, 1 in the separate churches' And
“ 2d. Of the whole of the Tenth Article of the basis.”
Wm. Adams, Chairman.
In regard to this, and in that spirit of truth and kindness so essential to any genuine and lasting union, we remark: —
1. To say that the action of our Presbyteries does “ not make any alteration in the principles of the plan submitted by the joint committee ” does not express the whole, or the most es- sential part of the truth in the premises. The trouble was that the plan was ambiguous in its doctrinal platform. As was clearly shown, it was interpreted in one way by its advocates in our body, and in an opposite sense by its supporters in the other branch, — a sense which when understood could not gain the sanction of our Church. Hence its rejection. It is true that no alteration has been made in the principles of the plan as it was interpreted by most of its advocates in our Church when first promulged. But a great change has been made in the principles of this plan as it was interpreted in the other branch. We still mean to allow liberty within what we deem the essentials of the Calviuistic scheme. This we meant then and always. But we did not mean to bind ourselves to regard and treat as non-essential whatever had been tolerated at any time in either branch of the Church. Nor do we mean that now. And we have taken away all pretext for supposing that we mean it. On account of the ambiguity of the platform now rejected, there was some color for the conjecture that we did mean it. Some few among us may have meant it. The great body of our Church has shown most unmistakably that they did not mean it. No statements or arguments of the joint committee not adopted or ratified by our ecclesiastical bodies, can have the slightest countervailing authority.
I
1S69.] Presbyterian Reunion. 295
2. We do not admit tliat to adopt in the united Church the simple doctrinal Standards which both now adopt, without any additional modifications, exactions, or conditions, involves any concession on either side. Both are thus put on a footing of perfect equality. If they cannot unite and trust each other on this basis, then they are not, in our opinion, prepared for reunion. If the New School in this plan are called to give up the demand for other guaranties of liberty, the Old School equally give up their demand for other guaranties of ortho- doxy. It is as broad as it is long. Each party on this basis concedes as much as the other, and neither concedes any thing, because both alike, in form at least, now adopt the Standards without qualifying formulas or conditions.
3. Hence the argument that the 10th Article should be dropped, as an alleged equivalent concession to the New School fails. Whatever other arguments may be produced for its abandonment, this of its being an offset to concessions made by the New School in adopting our doctrinal Standards pure and simple, is null. No concessions are thus made and no place for such offsets exists, if the principle of such offsets ought to have any place whatever in the negotiations of great Christian bodies respecting the truth of God and order of his house. This is not a case for dealing back and forth, or for giving and taking what is our own to dispose of. We are stewards of God’s herein, and have no commission to yield that with which we are intrusted, at our pleasure or con- venience. We are not to surrender great principles of truth, right, order, as offsets, concessions, or in any other way. We are simply to administer the trust confided to us in all fidelity, and not to consent to the surrender of principles, or the abdi- cation of powers, which are involved in maintaining the purity of the Church. Suppose that, instead of this, the compensative “ concession ” asked were, that congregational committee-men, who avow no allegiance to our Standards should have a place in our church courts, could it receive a moment’s considera- tion ?
Again, so far as concessions relative to the Tenth Article are concerned, they have already been made, and ex abundanti
296 Recent Developments respecting [April,
by the Old School in the basis* as it now stands. With us the examination of ministers received from other bodies is now made imperative. This is requisite to its full efficacy. It relieves the exercise of it of all that is seemingly invidious and offensive, and secures its universal application. Now that it is left optional, it will be very likely to prove nugatory in the case of all Pres- byteries that do not adopt it as an ordinary rule. For the very fact of its being ordinarily dispensed with, will render it difficult and odious to apply it in cases supposed to require it. To apply it then only, is equivalent to saying to the candi- date, “ We suspect you, sir, and we therefore put you to the proof.” On the other hand, while by leaving it optional we make a great concession, this involves small concession on the part of our New School brethren. The right thus to examine applicants for admission to any Presbytery, -which is all for which the Tenth Article provides, was ably vindicated by Dr. Stearns, a leading member of the New School branch of the -joint committee, both on the floor of the last New School As- sembly, and in an article in the American Presbyterian Re- view for July, 1868. It was also virtually asserted by the first New School Assembly in 1838, in the preamble to the resolution declaring the imperative requirement by the pre- vious Assembly, that the Presbyteries make such examinations, to be “null and void,” in the following words : — “ Whereas, it is the inherent right of Presbyteries to expound and apply constitutional rules, touching the qualifications of their own members, therefore,” &c., &c.f If the Tenth Article does not assert all this, it is involved in this. Whatever else this in- cludes, it asserts the right to judge of and apply constitutional rules in the premises ; and this surely involves the right to judge that candidates may be examined, and to apply that judgment in their actual examination.
Why then should it be omitted ? Some say that it amounts
* As members of the joint committee, the brethren of the New School commit- tee have expressly asserted as much. The report of the joint committee says : ‘A new Article, here designated the Tenth, has been introduced, in which some concession has been made on both sides , designed to reconcile conflicting claims and usages.”
f See Baird's Digest , page 251.
I860.] Presbyterian Reunion. 297
to nothing. The right exists independently of it. It is in- herent in the nature of a Presbytery. Why then retain it, if our Hew School brethren object to it? Some questions are best answered by others. Why do our Hew School brethren object to and desire to expunge it? Doubtless because some of them think that this will virtually and practically annul or weaken it ; that it will imply a sort of tacit contract between the bodies that it shall fall into abeyance and disuse ; so that if any Presbyteries attempt to exercise the right in the united Church, they can be charged with violating the understanding implied in dropping the Tenth Article, which asserts the right. If this article had never been incorporated in the basis and then dropped, such an inference would be unwarranted and impertinent. But having been put there and then dropped , while the other articles remain , the inference is quite natural that those who demanded its erasure sought, and those who conceded it consented, that the right which it asserts shall not be exercised. We think, therefore, that to concede this re- quest, if it does not abolish, at least greatly imperils and weakens the right which the Tenth Article guards.
The question then arises, ought it thus to be surrendered or imperilled? We think not. We do not believe our Church, on sober reflection, will think so. The plain objection to such a course is, that it virtually empowers a few Presbyteries, and even a single one, which may become lax in doctrine, to give an indefinite number of ministers in sympathy with them a full and unquestioned standing in all the Presbyteries of the Church. If a majority in one of the smallest of them should happen to be in sympathy with views like Dr. Bushnell’s on the Vicarious Sacrifice of Christ, or like those of some young ministers in Hew England adverse to the eternity of future retributions, and should choose to license and ordain them ad libitum , and then pass them by certificates to other Presbyte ries, what is to hinder ? But it is said that the evil may be arrested afterward by putting such persons on trial for heresy. All know the difficulties and embarrassments of this process, how rarely those holding such views, publish them in a form that will expose them to the necessary technicalities of judi- cial investigation, and how rarely trials for heresy can or will
298 Recent Developments respecting [April,
be attempted, even when it is prevalent and outspoken. The process of examining intrants, while harmless to all sound ministers, is a thousandfold more efficacious in repressing the spread of the little leaven that leavenetli the whole lump, than any number of ecclesiastical prosecutions without it. It is within our personal knowledge, that before the division of our Church, it was the habit of the students of a theological semi- nary out of our bounds, and much complained of for heretical doctrines, to repair to certain Presbyteries known to be in sympathy, to be licensed, and thus acquire ministerial stand- ing in any part of our Church in which they could find afield of labor. This was one of the causes moving to the adoption of the rule requiring an examination by all our Presbyteries of applicants for admission to them. It was a sound and reason- able rule. To relax it so far as no longer to compel, but simply to permit, such examinations by Presbyteries that choose to have them, is going to the extreme verge of concession and compromise. To go further and compromise or imperil the right or liberty so to examine is, it seems to us, out of the question.
We do not admit, as some seem to argue withal, that the omission of the Tenth Article is any logical consequence of adopting the Standards pure and simple as a doctrinal basis. This is a matter of administration purely. It stands on a different footing entirely, and the alleged inference is a pure non sequitur.
But if such should be the logical consequence, it reaches a great deal further, and obviously sweeps away the whole plat- form butthe First Article, which unites the two bodies upon the basis of our common Standards, thus imposing no further con- ditions, and leaving all other controverted points to be settled by the united Church. It leaves out the provision for tolera- ting mixed churches, and all else about boards, theological seminaries, &c.
This wider application of the logic of the New School com- mittee has been immediately and as by intuition, seized upon and extensively carried out in answer to their address and its reasonings. Dr. Musgrave at once introduced into the Cen- tral Presbytery of Philadelphia, resolutions which were unani-
1869.]
Presbyterian Reunion.
299
mously adopted, approving of union on the basis of our com- mon Standards, without any other conditions, leaving all other matters to be settled by the united Churches, and at the same time proposing to the other Presbyteries of both branches of the Church to take similar action at their spring meetings, so that their respective Assemblies may consummate the reunion on this basis, at their next meetings in New York City. This plan has already received the qualified or complete indorse- ment of several journals of our Church. The reasons urged in its favor are —
1. That it involves no commitment for or against the Tenth Article, or any other article in the Basis, except what is in- volved in accepting our Standards.
2. The Standards are now the common bond of union in both Churches. Acceptance of these in their fair import is all that we require or have a right to require of individuals, ministers, or Presbyteries as a condition of admission. It is the true basis for admitting larger bodies that we are prepared to admit at all. Dr. Musgrave thus states his conception of the advantages of this scheme : —
“1. It proposes a doctrinal basis to which we are all agreed, viz.: our common Standards, pure and simple.
“2. It avoids all constitutional changes, and so obviates the necessity of fur- ther negotiation and delay.
“ 3. It removes all opposition to the reunion arising from differences of opinion respecting other articles as terms or conditions of reunion.
“ 4. It may prevent litigation and would certainly secure all our trust funds, &c. “5. It meets the wishes of our brethren of the other branch with regard to the Tenth Article, by not making its retention a condition of reunion.
“ 6- It is magnanimous ; honoritigto the Great Head of the Church, and expres- sive of that mutual respect and confidence becoming Christian gentlemen pro fessing the same faith and polity.”
Other quite obvious advantages are, that while it does not offend our New School brethren in regard to the Tenth Article, neither does it offend us by that marked demonstration against it, and the principle of it, which would be implied in dropping it and retaining the residue. And here we must interpose a caution against one construction we have noticed of the mean- ing ot Dr. Musgrave and others in our branch of the Church who tavor this plan. It has been said that they thus signify their willingness to join the New School in giving up the
300 Recent Developments respecting [April,
Tenth Article. But they consent to giving up the Tenth only on condition that the whole are given up, a course which leaves the principle of that article as intact as if no compact were made. Are the other branch ready for this, and do their committee mean this? Still further, this plan does not give to the several articles omitted that more than constitu- tional sacredness, which might possibly attach to them, if they were parts of the compact made as a condition precedent and conditional to reunion. However inconvenient any of them might prove in practice, there would be great and scru- pulous hesitation about disturbing them during the life-time of the generation that constituted the reunion. This difficulty would not pertain to arrangements made as a consequence, and not as a condition, of reunion.
At the same time the argument on this subject is not wholly on one side. "We cannot hesitate to call attention to the grave difficulties and dangers of a union which leaves the points specified in the several articles still unsettled. We fear that the inevitable controversies and disputes in regard to the prop- er settlement of them after the consummation, may re-open many of the wounds which caused or grew out of the original division, but are now closed or rapidly closing. This would not be, indeed, if there were that unity in doctrine and order, and that fully restored harmony and confidence between the bodies contemplated in the resolutions of our Assembly which ini- tiated the negotiations for reunion. But when we look at the range of topics and interests involved pertaining to boards, publications, seminaries, semi-congregational churches, the ex animation of ministers, &c., on the one hand, and the present appearance as to doctrinal agreement, mutual confidence, &c., on the other, we cannot be very sanguine that all is plain sail- ing in unruffled seas and that there are no breakers ahead We can only hope that in the event of this solution of the re- union problem (which has so much, notwithstanding the perils above indicated, to recommend it, on condition that the parties are really prepared for reunion), its consummation will find the parties so entirely at one, that all such apprehensions will prove groundless. But just now, as we are throwing ofi these sentences, there are other indications and portents. How
1869.]
P resbyterian Reunion.
301
long they will remain we cannot say, for almost every month gives some new turn to the shifting and varying aspects of this subject that have continued to come and go from its first agitation. The present indications to which we refer are simply those furnished by the committee and other organs and representatives of the New School body. First, we have already seen what they are in respect to polity as embodied in the Tenth Article. They decline to accept the amended basis with that article and ask us to concur with them in dropping it. Now if our Presbyteries were to agree to drop that article, it would settle nothing. It would only throw it into a doubtful position, and substitute ambiguity for certainty. The right would still certainly be claimed, exercised, and contended for to the last in our body. We quite agree with the Presbyte- rian in the following words: —
“For we are but giving fair warning to our brethren of the other branch, when we say that there are many in our Church who will immediately demand that the right of examination shall be acknowledged as an inherent right of Presbytery, and will carry this claim of right up through all the courts of the Church, until it is recognized by the highest tribunal, and made thus the law of the Church.”
But our New School brethren ask that the Tenth Article be dropped, because it asserts and confirms a righ which many of them do not mean to concede. Says the Evangelist
“ Is the Presbyterian ignorant of the grounds on which the provisions of the Tenth Article are maintained or assailed? We would call its attention to the debates — among other things to the able speech of Dr. Patterson, in the As- sembly at Harrisburgh. ‘ It is agreed, affirms the article, that the Presbyteries possess the right to examine ministers applying for admission from other Presby- teries ?’ What right ? Why the constitutional right, as inferred from the lan- guage of the Standards, and the usages or precedents of the Church. This right the opponents of the article deny. And they object to the article, because they are not willing to have a constitutional question decided against them by the agreement of a treaty of reunion.”
On the other hand the Observer asks that it be dropped for the opposite reason and in the following terms : — “ The right acknowledged in the Tenth Article is inherent in the Presbytery, and needs no recognition in the basis of union. No one can be received into Presbytery but by the vote of the body ; and the right to vote implies the right to say no or yes, as the Presbytery prefer.” If the right is in-
302 Recent Developments respecting [Apkil,
herent, then why bring it into question, as will be done by omitting it, and at the same time retaining the other articles following the first? And does it not appear that there is dan- ger of severe conflicts about it, if it remain unsettled till after the consummation of the union ?
In regard to the doctrinal basis, it would be simple fatuity to ignore or blind ourselves to the indications which appear in authoritative quarters. The New School committee say in their address already quoted : “ It must, however, be well
understood, that by agreeing to the omissions in question, the Presbyteries do not relinquish nor deny the right to all rea- sonable liberty in the statement of views, and the interpreta- tion of the Standards as generally expressed in the First Arti- cle as it now stands ; and also that the interpretation of their own language by the joint committee, in the preamble and conclusion of their report, May, 1868, is to be accepted as the true interpretation.” This is saying, that while we do not insist on the express incorporation of the Gurley amend- ment rejected by the Old School Church, we understand the simple Standards to mean exactly the same, and to guarantee the same liberty or latitude of doctrinal toleration as if it were there. Dropping it in the letter, they retain it in spirit and power. And this can mean no less than that they retain it in their interpretation of it. as securing the toleration of what- ever has been tolerated at any time in either body, the inter- pretation which prevailed in their last General Assembly and was employed to commend it to their Church, It is no less certain that this interpretation of it among the New School caused its rejection by the Old- School, who will not consent and have given full notice that they will not consent, to bind the united Church to such doctrinal looseness and incertitude; and further by the Hall resolution (so called from its mover), already adverted to, that they consider the holding of errors hitherto condemned by either branch of the Church as a bar to licensure and ordination.
We think the view of the New School Committee is sub- stantially indorsed by the journals of their Church. It is more than indorsed, it is thrice intensified by the American Presby- terian, which represents an earnest, but we know not how ex-
1869.] Presbyterian Reunion. 303
tensive section of that Church. We trust not large, for if so, reunion seems further in the distance than we had believed. It says : —
“Our brethren of the other branch will see that, in accepting their recent offer of ‘the Standards pure and simple,’ we have not receded from our denominational position as to the right of interpretation and the entire equality of the various types of Calvinism already having a recognized existence in both bodies. They must go into the reunion with their eyes open. They are not proselytizing us any more than we are proselytizing them. They do not take us into their body any more than we take them into ours. Meeting us with these declarations on our lips, in the very act of accepting their terms, although we do not insist upon incorporating them into the terms, they must, if they are the honorable men we take them to be, either inscribe these declarations on the unwritten but deeper heart contract between us, or frankly reject the reunion altogether. Any middle course is incompatible with the simplest principles of Christian integrity. Such, we think, will turn out to be the practical effect of the committee’s declaration, if adopted by the Presbyteries.
“We, therefore, advise Presbyteries to incorporate the committee’s own declara- tion of sentiments into their action ; to reiterate their adherence to the explana- tions of the basis, as well as to express their assent to the changes proposed. Meanwhile, we wish it understood that, while this is our preference, we here pledge adherence to the committee’s plan as it stands, if the Church can be rallied on that alone, believing that if reunion is consummated by joint action of both branches in full view of the sentiments of that report, stringent Presbyterianism will be put into a hopeless minority. Well-posted men on both sides assure us that such will be the result.”
It is a poor rule that will not work both ways. We have declared with unmistakable explicitness that we will not qual- ify our Standards with the Gurley amendment, and will be free to administer them in what we deem their true and essen- tial import, unfettered by any such compacts of relaxation ; and that we consider holding opinions hitherto condemned by either branch of the Church a bar to licensure or ordination. And we have declared these things in Assembly and Presby- tery. We did this before the issuing of the address of the New School committee. If the foregoing language of the Ameri- can Presbyterian is applicable to us, is it not thrice applicable to them ? “ Meeting us with these declarations on our lips,
they must, if they are the honorable men we take them to be, inscribe these declarations on the unwritten but deeper heart contract between us, or frankly reject the reunion altogether. Any middle course is incompatible with the simplest princi- ples of Christian integrity.” We certainly shall by no vote of
304 Recent Developments respecting [April,
ours, expressly or by implication, knowingly commit ourselves to tbe principle of the Gurley amendment.
Suppose, however, the advice of this journal to be followed by the New School Presbyteries: that they “ incorporate the committee’s own declaration of sentiments into their action, and reiterate their adherence to the explanations of the basis,” then do they not expressly adopt the Gurley amendment re- jected by our Presbyteries? Are not the two bodies approv- ing of totally different and contradictory platforms in form, certainly in intent and effect? In truth the address of the committee, if followed by their Presbyteries, without express disclaimer of its interpretation of the doctrinal article as amended, in effect makes the meaning of the Gurley amend- ment a part of the amended basis as accepted by the New School Church, even while dropping its form.
The proper conclusion from all the facts and considerations thus brought before us, is in some points clear, if in others doubtful. There are obviously two great and wholly different questions on which the reunion movement hinges, often con- founded but entirely distinct from each other, although the answer given to the one may shed much light in that prop- er to be given to the other. These are, 1. What is proper basis for reunion when the parties are ripe for it? 2. Are they now so agreed in doctrine, and so grounded in mutual confidence as to be ripe for reunion upon such a basis ? In respect to the first question there are now three plans before the two bodies.
1. The plan of the joint committee sent down to the Pres- byteries by both the last Assemblies, with the Smith and Gur- ley amendments left out of the first or doctrinal article. This, as thus amended, we think has been approved by the majori- ty of the Old School Presbyteries. But it has been accepted by the New School Presbyteries without such amendment. Now their committee propose its acceptance with this amend- ment, and another in addition to which the Old School have not yet assented. But they virtually reject, and advise their Presbyteries to reject, the plan as now approved by a majority of the Old School Church. This probably insures its rejection in this form. We have then before us —
1869.]
305
Presbyterian Reunion.
2. The plan proposed in the address of the New School committee, which is simply the above with the Tenth Article omitted. A great omission ! To which, for reasons already given, and from manifold indications in our Church, we do not believe that it will consent, unless some or all other provisions in the plan of the joint committee, beyond the Standards pure and simple, are also expunged or altered. This brings before us, lastly, the plan of Dr. Musgrave and the Central Presbytery of Philadelphia, unanimously commended by them to all the Presbyteries of both branches of the Church for adoption in the following form : —
“ W7iereas, Both branches of the Presbyterian Church have expressed their agreement in doctrine and polity; and whereas their reunion, without unneces- sary delay, is highly desirable : Therefore,
*■ Rtiolved. That we would cordially approve of reunion on the basis of our com- mon Standards, pure and simple, leaving all matters that have been subjects of negotiation between the two bodies to be afterward settled by the united Church.
“ Resolved, That we respectfully suggest to all the Presbyteries of both branches, which approve of the foregoing resolution, to adopt the same, in order that both Assemblies, at their next meeting, may consummate the union upon this basis without further negotiation or delay.”
"We do not know the evidence that both branches “have expressed their agreement in doctrine and polity,” beyond the acceptance of the Standards with the diverse constructions and applications of them already brought to view. In regard to consummating the union upon this or any basis, without sub- sequent reference to the Presbyteries, we may have a word to say further on. Irrespective of these questions, however, the basis proposed is that of the Standards, pure and simple, leav- ing all other questions to be adjusted after the union. On the supposition that the contracting parties are sufficiently harmonious to be really ripe for reunion, and to be able after its consummation to adju.-t the points in controversy without perilous alienations and contentions, we would say that this is the best basis of all. But in proportion as mistrust aud doc- trinal differences still prevail, do additional guards and guaran- ties become necessary in the interest of unity and for the pre- vention of discords. However this may be, as the first and second of the plans proposed appear to be out of the question, we are, at least till the Assemblies meet, left to that of the
306 Recent Developments respecting [April,
Standards pure and simple as the last alternative. And until both bodies are prepared to unite eordially and in mutual con- fidence on this basis, we doubt if they are prepared for a happy and prosperous reunion on any basis. Such language as the following is now frequently uttered by men of the highest standing in both bodies. If union can be had with mutual esteem and confidence, we shall be glad of it. If not, we do not want it. We have little or no hope in any stipulations and provisoes that may be agreed upon as a basis of union. The necessity of any such stipulations at all, save the Standards pure and simple, does not augur well for the prospect of any union that demands them.
What evidence then do the parties exhibit as to present preparation for reunion on this simple basis ? When the time comes that both Churches, with insignificant exceptions, are conscious of such doctrinal harmony and mutual confidence that they are ready to unite cordially upon this footing, with- out casting at each other antagonistic and defiant construc- tions of it, and charges of dishonor against such as do not accept them, then will the set time to favor our Presbyterian Zion, by a reunion of its sundered branches, have come. In view of the ground talien in the address of the New School committee, and the expressions of opinion and feeling evoked by it in very high quarters as already set forth, has that time come yet ? Does it seem nearer or more distant than before the publication of that document ? Should reunion fail of immediate and complete consummation for these reasons, is it asked, where is the responsibility for it ? We are not dis- posed to regard it as a case for accusation against either side. It would be simply due to the discovery, as the result of all the proposals and discussions growing out of the negotiations in regard to reunion, that the solemn convictions of each side as to the degree of doctrinal strictness to be maintained, differ so seriously that they cannot come together without a prospect of jealousies and contentions in the united Church, more dis- astrous than their present condition. In other words, the great majority of the Old School desire reunion, but only on con- dition that it can be had without peril to their orthodoxy, which is to them a sacred trust. The great majority of the
J 869.]
Presbyterian Reunion.
307
New School desire it, only on condition that it can be had without peril to their liberty, which is to them an equally sa- cred trust. The proper reconciliation of these differences in the united body has been the grand problem awaiting solution from the first — a solution not yet reached — to the satisfaction of both bodies. And it remains to be seen whether it will be reached before or during the ensuing meeting of the Assemblies in New York.
Should it come to this, that in any future stage of this move- ment, the two Churches are restored to such mutual confidence as to be ready to trust each other cordially and uncondition- ally upon the basis of the Standards without other stipulations, the New School body would greatly have the advantage over the Old School in one matter of the highest importance. We refer to the Theological Seminaries. All our seminaries, and none of the New School, are under the control of the General Assembly. This would admit them to a full share in the con- trol of ours, while they retain full power to exclude us from all share in the administration of theirs. This is in reality of far more consequence than all the other matters involved, save the doctrinal article. It involves the training and moulding of the future ministry of the Church. And this in the end in- volves nearly every thing. Here we should stake — who can say how much? — upon their fairness and magnanimity. Yet once let it appear that they are so with us in doctrinal atti- tude and mutual love and confidence, as to render union on this basis safe and expedient, and we will cheerfully risk our seminaries and all else upon the administration of the united Church.
A word as to the plan of consummating this union without submitting it to the Presbyteries for ratification. We think such a course every way unadvisable. If any basis should be agreed upon besides the Standards, grave questions would arise whether they were not of the nature of the “consti- tutional rules,” which our constitution declares not binding until submitted to the Presbyteries and approved by a majori- ty of them. At all events they ought not to be made bind- ing without such approval. On the other hand, if the basis adopted be the Standards merely, still the union ought to be VOL. xli. — NO. II. 100
308
Developments respecting Reunion.
[April,
ratified by the Presbyteries before it is consummated. Other- wise grave questions and doubts will arise in regard to the semi-congregational churches and their constitutional basis. It is quite possible, that even after an agreement by the two assemblies on this basis, it might appear that antagonistic constructions of the Standards, and expressions of mutual distrust bad become open, loud and bitter to a degree, that would satisfy the most ardent enthusiast for reunion, that the time for it had not yet come — that it ought to be arrested for the present. If so, if murmurs and reproaches should become rife, of which some words already quoted are samples, how unfortunate that it should be passed bevond review by the Presbyteries. If happily it should be other- wise, which may God grant ; if it should turn out that all things were then ready for the consummation, how much more thorough and complete would the union be, if deliberately ratified by the Church in her Presbyteries after the most thorough discussion. Already plans which have passed two Assemblies have, on thorough examination, been found too faulty to gain Presbyterial ratification. It would not certainly be strange if measures should be urged through under the pressure so common in large assemblies which will need revision by the calm judgment and deeper second thought of the Church. The incalculable interests involved should surely preserve so great a measure from all undue haste and precipitancy, and insure its being consummated only with the most solemn sanctions and ratifications known to the Church. A plan which cannot bear this test, gives faint promise of insuring future unity, peace, and prosperity in the united Church
1869.] Short Notices of Recent Publications.
309
NOTICES OF KECENT PUBLICATIONS.
Annals of the American Pvlpit ; or Commemorative Notices of Distin- guished American Clergymen , of various denominations, from the ear- ly settlement of the country to the close of the year eighteen hundred and fifty -five. With Historical Introductions. By Win. B. Sprague, 1). D. Volume IX. New York: Robert Carter & Brothers, 1869.
The public will receive this further instalment of Dr. Sprague’s Annals with an appetite sharpened by the long interval since the appearance of the last — a delay not due to any want of promptness in the author’s preparation, whose punctuality is quite equal to his facility and fertility, but to the enhanced cost of printing, which has so seriously obstructed many important publications. The present volume embraces the Lutheran, Reformed Dutch, Associate, Associate Reformed, and Reformed Presbyterian Churches, which, though (the Lutheran excepted) not large, have nevertheless been marked by strong and noble charac- teristics, and adorned with some of the most honored names in the American Church. The great value and general merits of this series of Annals, which no living man but Dr. Sprague could have produced, have been so often and vari- ously set forth in our pages, that they do not now need repetition. They let us into the life, history, traits of all the great churches of our country, as nothing else could. Most of the great preachers and pastors of the United States are sketched in monographs; themselves in turn the products of the great authors of our country, and of other great men seldom, if ever, authors elsewhere. We know not where else the religious, moral, and intellectual power of the nation is more largely and variously represented. This is peculiarly true of the religious bodies, whose great preachers, and general constitution and history are given in the present volume. Aside from other points of interest and attraction common to all the volumes of this series, probably no exhibition of the peculiarities of the various Christian bodies represented in this, can elsewhere be found in a form so interesting, accurate, and accessible. Each new volume of this great work im- presses us afresh with the debt of gratitude which the American Church owes to Dr. Sprague.
A Half Century with Juvenile Delinquents ; or the New Yorlc House of Refuge and its Times. By B.K. Peirce, D. D., Chaplain of the New York House of Refuge. New York: D. Appleton & Co., 1869.
We received this valuable work barely in time to record its title among the book notices of our last number. But after examination we find it deserves more special notice. Whatever sheds light on the true method of recovering the
310
Short Notices
[April,
fallen, and rescuing the abandoned youth in our cities, is a contribution to one of the greatest problems of social science and Christian enterprise in our day. The life-long experience of Dr. Peirce, his intimate personal knowledge of the growth of the House of Refuge in New York, and of the reasons which have led to the methods pursued there and elsewhere, and of the comparative merits of each, have given him qualifications for such a work as few possess. The persons, scenes, incidents which he describes, give it much of the charm of romance. The discussions in regard to the “congregate system,” which masses large bodies of fallen youth together in reformatories, as compared with the contrary system ; the comparison of different systems of training; the views presented as to location, architecture, along with the drawings of the admirable structures on Randall’s Island and elsewhere ; the summation of the laws, statutes, and judici .1 deci- sions on a multitude of points that have emerged in the development of this great charity, with much other valuable matter, render this work an important aid in the solution of some of the more difficult questions in sociology, legislation, and Christian philanthropy.
Forty-second Annual Report of the Few York City Mission and Tract So- ciety, with Brief Notices of the Operations of other Societies , Church Directory , List of Benevolent Societies , Statistics of Population, etc. 30 Bible House, i869.
This elaborate report is an admirable account of what it is styled on the cover,
“ Christian Work in the Metropolis.” It is a very appropriate companion of the book just noticed. It brings fully to view all the chief agencies for evangelizing the great metropolis, which are counterworking the gigantic forces that are at work for its destruction. To those who are studying the problem of Christian- izing the population of our cities, into which such masses of the people are gath- ering, it is a pamphlet of the greatest value.
Scriptural Baptism , Mode and Subject. By Rev. Isaac Murray, Presby- terian Minister, Cavendish ( P. E. I. ). Charlottetown, P. E. T., I860, pp. 115.
This small volume contains much valuable matter, well presented and arran- ged. The writer gives evidence of having read extensively and carefully on the subject on which he treats. He shows clearly not only that it is impossible to carry out consistently the theory that the word “baptize” means simply and alwavs to dip or immerse, but that the most strenuous Baptist writers are con- strained to give up that point, and to admit that baptism may be effected by affusion or by falling dew. The usual conclusive arguments are also presented against the assumption that the word in the New Testament necessarily means to immerse, or that Christian baptism was always or ordinarily administered in that form. The question concerning the right of believing parents to have their in- fant children consecrated to God in baptism, is also well argued. Mr. Murray’s book is well adapted to do good service where the minds of people have been un- settled on either of the points which he here discusses.
The History of the Hebrew Nation , and its Literature. By Samuel Sharpe. London, 18G9.
The author is a well-known Egyptologist, and has also published translations
I860.]
311
of Recent Publications.
of the Scriptures, and various works in illustration of them. The work be- fore us belongs to the most slashing and destructive productions of the critical school. We agree with the author in the opening sentence of his preface : “The history of the Hebrew nation must be carefully studied if we would understand the Bible.” We suggest to him that the Bible must be more devoutly studied if he would understand either Hebrew history or sacred literature. He tells us that “ these writings have come down to our time in a very confused condition," and removes all confusion by showing (?) us, e. g., that Genesis was written in the reigns of David, Solomon, and ITezekiah ; that the prophecies of Isaiah can- not have been the work of fewer than six authors living at as many different times,” etc. The laws of the nation, “indeed, are all said to have been delivered by Jehovah to the Israelites on their march out of Egypt ; but this was only the priestly manner of saying that these laws were agreeable to the will of God." “ The prophet whose zeal in the cause of justice and religion raised him to become a teacher of his countrymen, claimed to have a message from Jehovah, and the priest who gave answers to the questions that were brought before him, whether of moral duty or civil justice, spoke in the name of Jehovah.” “ As nothing human is free from faults, so even the Bible must be read with judgment and discrimina- tion,” more we think than Mr. Sharpe has shown. He takes away our Bible, and what does he give us in return ? A book that gives us no possible assurance in regard to the mind and will of God. “ What advantage then hath the Jew ? Much every way ; chiefly because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.” But Mr. Sharpe’s oracles leave us in relation to God very much as the heathen are, “feeling after him.” We could not send out Mr. Sharpe's Bible for their evangelization.
A Grammar of the Idiom of the Xew Testament, &e. By Dr. George Benedict Winer. Seventh Edition, enlarged and improved by Dr. Gottlieb Liinemann, Professor of Theology at the University of Got- tingen. Revised and authorized Translation — by Prof. J. Henry Thayer, of the Theological Seminary, Andover, Mass. Published at Andover by Warren F. Draper, 1869. 8vo, pp. 720.
Prof. Thayer’s preface says that this translation is substantially a revision of Prof. Masson’s, Edinburgh, 1859, which has for some years been out of print The new translation is an improvement upon the previous one, not only in ac- curacy and definiteness, but because it incorporates the alterations of the Sventh German edition. After Winer’s death, Dr. Liinemann issued the seventh edition, containing, besides corrections and additions of his own, changes in more than three hundred and forty places left by Winer himself. Nearly three hun- dred pages of the translation had been stereotyped, when the revision and print- ing were begun anew in accordance with this new edition. The Andover Edi- tion also relieves the difficulty of reference which arises from the commentaries quoting from the various editions, by giving on the margin the paging of the sixth and seventh German editions, as well as of Prof. Masson’s translation. The Indexes have been revised, and that of Greek words considerably enlarged. The Index of passages in the New Testament has been made complete, and the refer- ences themselves carefully verified. This Index is between three and four times larger than in former editions, and adds greatly to the value of the book for reference, and especially as a text-book for students. So that while nothing has
312
Short Notices
[April,
been done either by the German or American editor to alter the character and plan of the work as Winer left it after the labor of a life, nothing lias been left undone to correct and complete it, and provide for its more extended use- fulness.
An Introduction to the Study of the New Testament , Critical , Exegetical , and Theological. By James Davidson, D. D., LL. D. In two vols., 8 vo. pp. 520, 547. London: Longmans, Green & Co., 1868.
This work appears as an independent one, and not as a new edition of the Intro- duction to the Xew Testament by the same author published in 1848-51. The progress in the author's views manifested in his introduction to the Old Testament, s no less apparent in this new work. And about the same degree of originality and critical discrimination is combined with considerable improvement in style and method. A few detached sentences from the Preface, in which the author sets forth very plainly the point of view from which he writes, will show the sources from which his materials are drawn. “The amount of theology needed to constitute a religion may be indefinitely small. If men could see that the Spirit of God neither dwelt exclusively in apostles, nor rendered them infallible, however highly gifted they may have been, the sacred word would be less distort- ed, and different values would be assigned to -the several parts of this volume according to their nature.” — “ God’s word is in the Scriptures, but all Scripture is not the word of God. The writers were inspired in various degrees, and are therefore not all equally trustworthy guides to belief and conduct.”
He quotes the decision of the Court of Arches, and of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, with great hope of the fruits they will bear in the Established Church.
In the former, June, 1862. judgment was delivered, in these words: “I think it is open for the clergy to maintain that any book in the Bible is the work of an- other author than him whose name it bears, provided they conform to the Sixth Article, by admitting that the book is an inspired writing and canonical.”
“ I do not find any legal authority for holding that to avow a belief that a part of Scripture is post-apostolical, is necessarily a declaration of its not being canonical.”
The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, 1866, officially announced: —
“The proposition that every part of the Scriptures was written under the in- spiration of the Holy Spirit is not be found either in the Articles, nor in any of the formularies of the Church.”
“ The doctrine, that every part of every book of Scripture, v; as written under the insmration of the Holy Spirit, and is the word of God, is not involved in he statement of the Sixth Article. Ac.”
After a discussion of the several books in chronological order, the author sums up the results under the following propositions: —
1. Before a. d. 170, no book of the Xew Testament was termed Scripture, or believed to be divine or inspired.
2. Xo certain trace of the fourth gospel can be found till after the middle of the second century, when it came into use among the Gnostics. Xot till the end of that century was it assigned to the apostle by fathers of_the Catholic Church and by canons.
1869.]
of Recent Publications.
313
3. The writings of Paul were not used and were little regarded by the prominent ecclesiastical writers of the first half of the second century.
4. The canon, as far as it relates to the four gospels, was not settled at the close of the first century, as Tischendorf supposes. Not till the later half of the second century did the present gospels assume a canonical position, superseding other works of a similar character and receiving a divine authority.
5. No canon of the New Testament, i. e., no collection of New Testament litera- ture like the present one, supposed to possess divine authority, existed before a. d. 200.
The value of the author’s conclusions from the facts which his book records may be'estimated by these quotations; unless it be more charitable to suppose that in his indiscriminate peddling of German learning, he has not been able to separate from better wares the results to which German philosophy has necessa- rily forced German criticism.
While the destructive character of the work is thus sufficiently evinced, we reserve for consideration whether the arguments by which he seeks to support these views are important enougli to demand more extended -and thorough ex- posure in a future number.
Notes on the Christian Life; a Selection of Sermons preached ly Henry Robert Reynolds , B. A., President of Cheshunt College , and Fellow of University College , London. With a Preface ly Rev. Elbert S. Porter, D. L). New York : P. S. Wynkoop & Son, 1868.
Sermons in order to bear printing so as to form a volume at once readable and profitable, beyond the circle of the preacher’s near friends, must possess very unusual merit, of a kind which does not evaporate in the mere delivery. Many sermons, indifferent or commonplace in themselves, are made very effec- tive by a powerful delivery. But like Bellamy’s sermon in a thunder-storm , which the audience besought him to publish, the thunder and lightning which made them impressive cannot be printed. This volume is a high exception to all this class of sermons. They are not only sound, evangelical, and instructive. They are fresh, original, and suggestive. They are set before us in style vivid, forcible, and sufficiently but not excessively ornate. Those that we have read, make us feel immediately that we are in contact with a mind of decided genius, culture, and good judgment. They are at once doctrinal, experimental, and practical, enuncia- ting or suggesting great principles and seeds of thought, while they fail not to give that detailed and familiar instruction needed by the thoughtless, the in- quiring, the penitent, and the believing.
Particular Providence , in distinction from General , necessary to the Fulfilment of the Purposes and Promises of God; illustrated by a course of Lectures on the History of Joseph. By William R. Gordon, S. T. D., Pastor of the Reformed Dutch Church in Seventh Av- enue, New York. Third edition. New York: P. S. Wynkoop & Son, 1868.
The importance of the doctrine of Particular Providence, all the greater from the extent to which it is now assailed by the Positive and other sceptical schools and ignored or scorned among the masses ; the wonderful fitness of the history of Joseph to illustrate and confirm it, conspire to render this volume opportune
314
Short Notices
[April,
and welcome. On the whole Dr. Gordon has treated it skilfully, and succeeded in popularizing important truths. His preface shows that he is not the man to utter an uncertain sound. He says, ‘‘the pulpit has yielded to the senseless clamor for practical preaching, to the exclusion, in a great degree, of doctriual sermons. Elaborate compositions upon ‘ blood and thunder,’ as they turn up in catastrophes, accidents, and political conflicts : beautiful essays on moral dis- orders in the community, whose finely executed periods fill our churches with ‘winking Madonnas:’ tender presentations of the claims ‘of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;’ magniloquent sudorifics and magnetic soporifics in the shape of sermons on ‘ special themes,’ have been the means in a great measure of perverting the public taste as to the correct standard of true evangelical excellence in the gospel sermon.”
We suggest to the author that the story of the dream that saved William Tennent (page 68 et seq.', has been thoroughly exploded by Chancellor Green of New Jersey, in the July number of this journal, 1868. Also that genuine prayer does not always “ express an alteration in our dispositions and feelings,” as it is represented, page 31.
Sacraments of the Church. By Rev. S. W. Crittenden. Philadelphia: Presbyterian Publication Committee. New York : A. D. F. Ran- dolph.
This is our first introduction to Mr. Crittenden.' But we hope it will not be our last. He well and ably maintains the Reformed doetriue of the Sacraments as distinguished from the Roman, Lutheran, and Rationalistic. He comes up fairly and squarely to the view set forth in our Standards. The Sacrament more prominently treated is Baptism, especially Infant Baptism, in itself, its surround- ings, implications, duties, privileges for all the parties concerned in it. He takes distinctly and strongly the ground of our Standards in regard to Infant church- membership, and its bearings on Christian nurture and training, and the great ad- vantage to the cause of religion of conforming our practice to this theory. In short, his view is that of the first article in this Review for January, 1857, from which he quotes. That article proved how far an unconscious deviation from our Standards had gone, by the earnest controversy it awakened; through which it worked its way at length to a place among the publications of our own Board. We are glad to see that the New School Publication Committee have given their imprimatur to similar views. If we could, throughout both branches of the Church, translate these views into life and practice we think it would be a great gain to family religion and youthful piety.
Thunder and Lightning. By W. De Fonvielle. Translated from the French, and edited by P. L. Phipson, Ph. D., F. C. S., &c. Illus- trated with thirty-nine engravings on wood. New York : Charles Scribner & Co.
The Wonders of Optics. By F. Marion. Translated from the French, and edited by Charles \V. Zinn, F. C. S. Illustrated with seventy engravings on wood and a colored frontispiece. New York : Charles Scribner & Co.
These volumes belong to a series designed to popularize science, and render its
1869.]
315
of Recent Publications.
latest discoveries aud applications known to readers of average intelligence and culture. They are admirably adapted to their purpose. The topics dis- cussed in them afford the most varied, brilliant, and sublime phenomena pre- sented in the whole realm of physical nature. They are treated and illustrated in a manner well befitting such high studies. The descriptions and pictorial illustrations are in every way instructive and fascinating. We should be glad to see books of this grade taking the place of at least a part of that flood of novels, which have so long deluged the reading public, vitiating morality, re- ligion, and even the intellect itself.
Views from Plymouth Pock ; a Sketch of the Early History of Plymouth Colony. Designed for Young People. By Z. A. Mudgp, author of the “ Christian Statesman.” Six illustrations. New York : Carlton & Lanahan. Cincinnati: Hitchcock & Walden. Sunday-school Department.
We find here an unexceptionable book for family and Sunday-school reading, which gives information in regard to the settlement of the first colony of English Puritans in this country, of which no American youth ought to be ignorant. It is published, also, in a style of neatness, not to say elegance, which makes it quite suitable for a gift book.
Tales from Alsace ; or Scenes and Portraits from Life in the Days of the Reformation , as drawn from the Old Chronicles. Translated from the German, with Introduction appended to the French edition, by the French translator. E. Rosseeuw St. Hilaire. New York : Robert Carter & Brothers, 1869.
This book has many of the characteristics which have given the Schonberg- Cotta series such currency aud popularity with our reading religious public. The tales have a solid basis of truth and fact in the Reformation period, and constitute a frame in which the great principles which animated it are happily set and il- lustrated.
Hades and Heaven ; or. What does Scripture reveal of the Estate and Employments of the Blessed Dead and of the Risen Saints. By the Rev. E. II. Bickersteth, M. A., author of “Yesterday, To-day, and Forever.” New York: Robert Carter & Brothers, 1809.
A beautiful little volume, which shows the author’s views of the condition of the Christian from death to the resurrection, and thence through eternity.
The Judgment Seat. A Discourse delivered in the Scotch Presbyterian Church , Few York, Dec. 27, 1808, on the occasion of his forty -fifth anniversary as pastor of the church. By Joseph McElroy, D. D. New York: Robert Carter & Brothers, 1869.
Few ministers in this country reach a pastorate of twenty-five years over the same congregation. Is it not an event then worthy to be signalized when one reaches his forty-fifth anniversary as pastor of the same flock, and this amid such shiftings of the inhabitants of the great metropolis, that his congregation are now in their third house of worship, to which they have been driven during this pe-
316
Short jYotices of Recent Publications. [April,
riod by the upward movement of population, and the last of them full far down town ? Whence the persistency arid tenacity of this pastorate, with the single exception of Dr. Spring’s, we believe, the oldest in New York ? Such solid, earn- est, faithful sermons as this, with the pastoral fidelity and tact, particularly with the children of the church, apparent in its closing words, reveal the secret : —
“ In conclusion, let me say to you, my young friends, that the Lord Jesus Christ has powerful claims upon you. You were early dedicated to his name, and cast upon his providence. This hand has sprinkled upon the foreheads of most of you the symbol of consecration to the fear, the love, and the service of God. The oath of his covenant is on your souls. Have your consciences felt the power of its obligation? Let one. my dear youth, who loves you verv ten- derly, and who, it may be. is now, for the last time on an occasion iike the pres- ent, addressing you. implore that you honestly, earnestly, and prayerfully en deavor to settle this point, before you give sleep to your eyes or slumber to your eyelids. Woe. woe to the man who breaks the line of hereditary godliness 1 Baptized children of the Church, ye are bound, as fast as the authority of God can bind you, to come out from the world, and openly and publicly to take upon you the Redeemer’s yoke.”
The Being of God, Moral Government , and Theses in Theology. By Miles P. Squier. D.D., late Professor of Intellectual Philosophy, Beloit Col- lege, Wisconsin. Edited by James E. Boyd. Rochester, N. Y. : E. Darrow & Kempshall, 1868.
This posthumous volume contains in a condensed form the substance of the principles and doctrines maintained by Dr. Squier in the books published by him while living. In regard to these we have shown our opinion at different times, as they came before us. In regard to the will, the origin of sin. the divine con- trol of free-agents. regeneration, and ability, etc., this, like his other works, main- tains the radical principles of what has been so long known as New Divinity. But in regard to the nature of virtue it takes high ground, and had it been re- ceived in season we should have given it a place among the publications at the head of our second article in this number bearing on this subject, lie tells us : “Happiness is the subordinate end .... properly an incidental end. It is consequent on right action, it is dependent on right action and a right state, and is secured in such a state and in a course prosecuted in its own interest and for its own sake .... the concomitant and result of an end rather than an end sought in action itself. Hence, The highest good is moral goodness or righteousness. This combines both means, and is the ultimate end, and is thus the 1 summura bonum ’ beyond which we cannot and need not go. This end is not to be sought for the sake of any other, and is perfection in itself, and would be vitiate! by be- ing prosecuted for the sake of any thing else supposed to be more ultimate. This is the end of all ends, and describes the object (or aim) of an action, aud the rea- sou for it. Do right because it is right. This is morality, this is divine, this is of the nature of a moral system, it is of the nature of God.” — Pages 138-9. We can pardon a great deal of error for so distinct and emphatic utterance of this most precious truth.
Loving Jesus Early. A True Life. Philadelphia: Presbyterian Publi-
cation Committee. New York : A. D. F. Randolph.
A well-written narrative, which, being founded on truth, escapes the objections which lie against so much of our fictitious, even though it be at the same time religious literature.
1869.]
Literary Intelligence.
317
A Discourse Commemorative of the Life , Labors , and Character of the late Iier. Phineas D. Gurley , P. D„ Pastor of the New York Avenue Presbyterian Church of Washington , 1). C. Delivered in said church on Sabbath, Dec. 13. A. D., 1868, at the request of the Session thereof. By William E. Sclienck, D.D.: of Philadelphia. Washing- ton, D. C. : William Ballantyne, 1869.
Besides this very full and appropriate discourse of Dr. Sehenck, this pamphlet also contains funeral addresses by Drs. Sunderland, Edwards, and others, togeth- er with resolutions of Session, Presbytery, and Synod on occasion of Dr. Gur- ley’s death. They all concur in assigning him the eminence he had for years en- joyed as oue of the chief pillars and ornaments, not only of the Presbyterian, but of the Christian Church. This was due not so much to brilliant or dazzling quali- ties as to a steady', balanced, penetrating intellect, invigorated by industry and perseverance, and guided by' a tender, earnest, and devout spirit. Toward the close of his life Dr. Gurley’s name became associated with certain great ecclesias- tical measures proposed by him in regard to the signers of the Declaration and Testimony, and Reunion, which have excited stubborn controversy. That he acted prayerfully and in all good conscience herein, has never been doubted. The amendment proposed by him to the doctrinal basis has, on mature consideration been rejected by a majority of our Church. We, however, quite agree with Dr. Schenck. that Dr. Gurley did not differ in principle from his brethren, so much as in regard to the proper meaning and force of the terms of the amendment which bears his name.
LITERARY INTELLIGENCE.
ENGLAND.
BaGSTEr’s Polyglot Bihle (in eight languages) is soon to be republished. It has been very scarce, and the new editiou meets a real want.
Blackader’s celebrated edition is also about to be republished. In the great abundance and variety of its marginal readings and references, and its supplements it stands alone, and the new edition is greatly to surpass the old, in the facili- ties it i3 to afford for comparing scripture with scripture, text with version, ver- sion with version, etc.
The 1000th volume of the Tauchnitz Collection of British Authors is to con- sist of the authorized English version of the New Testament, with notes by Tischendorf, containing the translation of the variations in the Sinaitic, Alexan- drian, and Vatican MSS, the whole carefully revised and edited by B. H. Cowper. The conception is a fine one and" deserves to be met by a large response in Eng- land and America.
Nutt (London) has just brought out Schmoller’s “ Concordance to the Greek Testament” in compact and convenient form.
Among recent exegetical works, we see announced a new edition of Pusey's valuable commentary on Daniel; Eadie on Galatians; Nelson on Hebrews. Denniston on the chief lessons in Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, and Thes’ salonians ; the translation of Keil and Delitzsch on the Minor Prophets (T. k T. C. & Co.) ; Vol. I. of the translation of Delitzsch on Hebrews (T. k T. C. & Co.) ; Row- landson on Mark ; Ho wson’s •* Metaphors of St. Paul ;” Vol. II. of the translation
318
Literary Intelligence.
[April,
of Ewald's “History of Israel;” and Malan’s “Plea for the authorized version of the New* Testament,” and for the Textus reeeptus, against Dean .Alford.
Edesheim’s “ History of Eiisha the Prophet,” Lord Chancellor Ilatherley’s “Continuity of Scripture” (3d edition). H. Bonar’s, “Light and Truth, or Bible Thoughts and Themes,” and Tristram’s “ Natural History of the Bible” (2d edr tion), must be noted as supplementary.
Ecclesiastical subjects still engross more attention than theology proper. And yet in many ways the Church of England is pressed to sharper definitions of its theology. Among works of this class we observe —
Cartwright “ On the Constitution of Papal Conclaves Martin's “Lord’s Supper in its Scriptural Aspects;”
Trevor's “Doctrine of the Sacrifice of the Eucharist;”
Perry’s “ Vox Ecclesise Anglican®, or the Church, the Ministry, and the Sacra- ments ;”
Joyce's “ Sword and Keys — the Civil Power in its relations to the Church;” Haddan and Stubbs’s “Councils and Ecclesiastical Documents relating to Great Britain and Ireland,” Yol. I. ;
Haddau’s “Apostolical Succession in the Church of England ;”
H. B. Swete’s “ England versus Rome;”
J. H. Blunt’s “ Reformation of the Church of England, its History, Principles, and Results (1514-1547);”
G. Williams’s “ Orthodox Church of the East in the 18th Century;”
Gilbert Sutton’s “Faith and Science;”
Dean Alford’s “ Essays and Addresses, chiefly on Church Subjects ;”
J. H. Rigg’s “Relations of John Wesley, and of Wesleyan Methodism to the Established Church of England.”
Pritchard’s “ Continuity of the Human with the Divine,” Landel’s “ Great Cloud of Witnesses.” Macgregor’s “Shepherd of Israel,” Stafford’s “Life of the Blessed Virgin,” Wiseman’s “Daily Meditations.” Boyd’s “Changed Aspects of unchanged Truths,” Keble’s “ Sermons, Occasional and Parochial,” Lambert’s ‘‘Codex Canonum Eeclesiae L’niversae,” Yol. I. of a new edition of the “ Hymns of the Wesleys.” the translation of Harless’ “ Christian Ethics” (T. AT. Clark A Co.) Yols. IX. and X. of the “Ante-Xicene Christian Library,” containing portions of Irenaeus, Hippolytus, Origen, Ac., must complete our theological list. (Scribner, Welford A Co. supply these and all other puolications of the Edinburgh house T. A T. Clark A Co., as special agents.
Lecky’s “History of European Morals from Augustus to Charlemagne,” which was to appear in March, and to be immediately republished by D. Appleton A Co., will attract no little attention.
Mr. Mill’s new edition of his father's “ Analysis of the Phenomena of the Human'Mind,” with its copious notes by Bain. Findlater, Grote, and the editor, will have much of the value of a new contribution to metaphysical literature.
Farrar’s “Seekers after God” (Sunday Library, Part 3), is an interesting ex- hibition of the views cf some of the Stoic philosophers. Part 4 contains Mac- donald’s “ England’s Antiphon” (a history of English hymns, Ac.) .
In History and Biography we have — Longman’s “ Life and Times of Edward III.;” Sir Edward Creasy’s “History of England,” Yol. I. (to the time of Ed- ward I., five vols in all) ; Miss Strickland’s “ Lives of the Tudor Princesses ;” Sir
1869.] Literary Intelligence. 319
H. M. Elliott’s “ History of India,” Yol. II. (in press). “ Memoirs on the History, Philology, and Ethnic distribution of the Races of Northwestern India,” by the same author (in press) ; J. Talbovs Wheeler’s ‘‘History of India,” Yol. II. (in press); Mr. Hamilton Gray’s “Etruria,” Yol. III. ; Kaye’s “Lives of Indian Offi" cers,” Yol. I. ; Miss Martineau's “ Biographical Sketches,” Countess Guiccioli’s “ Recollections of Lord Byron Buchanan’s “Life and Adventures of Auduou Dr. Hamilton’s “ Memoir and Remains of Rev. J. D. Burns;” Dr. Duff’s “Sketches of the Life of Lord Haddo;” Sir J. T. Coleridge’s “ Memoir of Keble;” A. D Coleridge's “ Life of Schubert” (translated).
Sir H. L. Bulwer is preparing a life of Viscount Palmerston.
A few interesting works of travel have appeared, among which are Burton’s “Exploration of the Highlands of Brazil;” Mrs. Foote’s “ Recollections of Cen tral America;” Bayard Taylor’s “ Byways of Europe ;’’ A. C. Smith’s “Attractions of the Nile and its Banks;” Gen. Chesney’s “Narrative of the Euphrates Expe dition in 1835-7,” now first published. R. H. Dana’s “ Two Years before the Mast” has just been brought out in England in a popular illustrated edition, and is about to appear here in a new edition.
In the department of English Literature and Belles Lettres we have Prof. Sir F. H. Doyle’s “Lectures on Poetry;” “Culture and Anarchy,” an Essay by Matthew Arnold; “ Studies in Poetry and Philosophy,” by Principal Shairp of St. Andrews; F. W. Newman’s “ Miscellanies” (in press); Merivale’s Transla- tion of the Iliad (our own Bryant is understood to be similarly engaged ) ; Lord Lytton’s translation of the Odes of Horace (announced) ; Lord Derby’s transla lions from the poets, ancient and modern; Story’s “Graffiti d’ltalia ;” Rogers’s “ Life and Songs of the Baroness Nairne.”
Arber’s English Reprints, issued monthly, consist of rare works of Milton, Latimer, Gosson, Sidney, Webbe, Selden, Ascham, Addison, Lyly, Villiers, Gas- coigne, Bishop Earle, &e., some of which have hardly been accessible at any price, but which are now in neat and careful editions, offered at very low rates.
A marvel in science is the new work of Mrs. Somerville, now 83 years of age, on “Molecular and Microscopic Science” (2 vols.) Prof. Phillips has brought out a valuable book on Vesuvius, discussing many volcanic phenomena. Prof- Bonamy Price of Oxford has published “ Principles of Currency.” The last volume in Murray’s series of Student's Manuals is Bevau’s “ Manual of Modern Geography.” Our countryman C. C. Perkins has brought out another splendid work on “ Italian Sculptors.” A collection of Lord Shaftesbury’s addresses is com- ing out, mainly on industrial subjects. One of the gems of the season is an edition of Horace, the text and notes by Munro, the illustrations derived from antique gems arranged by U. W. King, whose work on Antique Gems, published three years since, sufficiently attests his competence. Amidst all the excite- ments of politics, Gladstone sends to the press a new volume in his old lino ‘‘Lessons on Homer.”
GERMANY.
The largest group of works that appeared in Germany within the three months covered by our present survey was called forth by the centennial com- memoration of the birth of Schleiermaeher. The anniversary occurred on the 21st of November, and was greeted by discourses and ersays of various kinds
320
Literary Intelligence.
[April,
from many of the universities, from pulpits, and from the periodical press of every grade. Such a fact is a remarkable tribute to the influence which the great theologian had and still has over German mind. These publications em- body the estimate put on the character and the philosophical and theological re- lations and influence of Schleiermacher by men of every school in philosophy and theology. The most elaborate of them all is a volume (pp. viii, 606, large 8vo) from the pen of Dr. Schenkel of Heidelberg. Naturally these critics differ widely in their estimate, some laying great stress on Schleiermaeher’s advance on the position of the rationalists who had ruled Germany, others emphasizing liis divergence from the standards of orthodoxy. These new discussions will make valuable contributions to a more correct estimate of the real worth and work of Schleiermacher.
Spinoza is also the subject of not a little discussion. Dr. P. Schmidt discusses “ Spinoza aud Schleiermacher. The fortunes of their systems, and their mutual relation.’’ Dr. R. Avenarius has issued a work on “ The first two phases of Spinoza’s pantheism, and the relation of the first phase to the second.”
■Within the department of Exegesis and the kindred studies we see announced. Dr. F. Kauleu's ‘‘History of the Vulgate;" Dorner on a revision of Luther’s translation of the New Testament ; Nbldeke’s “ Untersuchungen zur Krilik des Alten Testaments;” Hilgenfeld’s “ Messias Judaeorum, libris eorum paulo ante et paulo post Christum natum conscriptis illustratus ;” Volkmar’s “Historical Ex- planation of the Gospels’’ (voL I. Mark and the Synoptists) ; E. Gerlach’s “Commentary on Lameutations ; ” J. C. K. Von Hofmann’s “Commentary on Romans,” Part 1 (being III., 1, of hiso Commentary on the New Testament); Prof. Beyschlag’s “Pauline Theodicy in Romans,” ix.-xi. ; Prof. F. Brandes’ “ Commentary on Galatians ;” Besser’s Practical Exposition of the same Epistle (vol. XI. of his excellent “ Bibelslunden”) ; A. Stolting’s “Contributions to the Exposition of the Pauline Epistles;” Delitzsch on the life of laboring men at the time of Christ ; Heiligstedt’s “ Preparation zum Propheten Jesaia, u. s. w.” Zockler’s “ Lectures on the primitive history of the earth and of man.” The third edition of Ewald’s “ History of Israel ” (eight volumes) is just completed.
From the Catholic press we have vol. II. of Prof. Scholz’s “Sacred Antiquities of Israel” (relating to seasons of worship, ritual, etc.). An elaborate work on Nazareth (pp. vii, 344) has just been issued by Tobler.
Within the department of didactic and speculative theology and philosophy, and their history we note Biedermann’s Christliche Dogmatik (Zurich) ; Pflei- derer's “ Religion, ihr Wesen und ihre Geschichte, u. s. w ;” Hirschfeld “ Ueber die Lehren von der Unsterblichkeit der Seele bei den verschiedenen Volkein ;” Ginella “ de notione atque origine mortis;” Lasson’s “Master Eckhardt, the Mvstic;” Von Kirchmann’s “ Philosophische Bibliothek,” in which are to be collected the principal works in ancient and modern philosophy, with biographi- cal and expository notes, and translations when requisite. The seven numbers thus far published contain an introduction by the editor, part of Kant’s Kritik, and Spinoza’s Ethik, and Schleiermacher’s Monologues. Naumann (Bonn) has brought out a work on “Natural Sciences and Materialism;” F. Hoffmann (Er- langen) vol. II. of his “Philosophical Writings;” aud W. Rosenkrantz “Die Wis- senschaft des Wissens und Begriindung der besonderen Wrissensehaften durch die allgemeine Wissenschaft, u. s. w.”
1869.]
Literary Intelligence.
321
Yon Oettingen (Erlangen) has brought out the first half of an elaborate work entitled Die Moralstatistik,” or Moral Statistics and Christian Ethics. It is an attempt to establish on an empirical basis a system of social ethics. He pro- ceeds in this volume in the way of induction to establish empirically laws of moral movement within the sphere of human society. He finds the facts sup- plied by human experience, wonderfully confirming the great fundamental ethical ideas of the Scriptures.
Yol. 1 of L. Geiger’s “ Origin and Development of Human Speech and Reason” is pronounced a very able and valuable contribution to the science of language on its metaphysical side. Yon Holtzendorf (Berlin) has recently published a work on the “ Principles of Politics,” and announces an Encyclopaedia of Juris- prudence. R. Volkmann, Part 1 of “Life, Writings, and Philosophy of Plutarch of Chaeronea,” and Biiehsenschutz, “ Traum und Traumdeutung im Alter- thume ” must complete this part of our summary.
In Ecclesiastical history we have a few monographs, continuations, and new editions that deserve mention : Lehmann’s “ Clementinische Schriften mit be- sonderer Riicksicht auf ihr literarisches Yerhaltniss Bernays’ “ Heracliti- schen Briefe;” Ebert’s ‘ Tertullian’s Yerhaltniss zu Alinucius Felix u. s. w. Schwane’s “ Doctrinal History of the Patristic Period,” Pt. III.; Yon Polenz, “His- tory of French Calvinism, Yol. V, containing the period from the death of Henry IV. to the Edict of Nismes ; Bohringer’s admirable “Church of Christ and its Witnesses,” 2d revised edition, Yol. I., Part 2, first half, containing Clement and Origen.
In classical history, literature, and archaeology we note Biidinger’s collection of valuable essays on Roman Imperial history (valuable monographs on important characters and events) ; Huschke on the old Roman year ; Brambach on the remodelling of Latin Orthography; Otto Jahn, two valuable monographs, “Veber Darstellungen des Handwerks und Handelsverkehrs auf antiken Wandgemalden,” and, 1 Aus der Alterthumswissenschaft” (a series of papers on archaeological topics) ; A Winckler, a careful monograph on the dwellings of the Greeks.
In Semitic philology we have S. Kohn’s “Samaritan Studies,” relating mainly to the Samaritan Pentateuch ; and M. A. Levy’s “ Seals and Gems with Aramean, Phoenician, ancient Hebrew, Himyarilic, Xabathsean, and ancient Syriac inscrip- tions.” A German as well as an English translation has appeared of S. Nilsson’s (Swedish) work on the “Stone Age, and the primitive inhabitants of the Scan- dinavian North.”
Germany lost within the last months of 1868 two of her most eminent men, whose names are especially familiar in theology and Christian literature, in Prof. Karl Immanuel Nitzsch, long professor of theology at Berlin, who died there August 21. in his 81st year; and Dr. F. W. Krummacher, the celebrated court preacher of Potsdam and Berlin, who died at Potsdam, December 11th, at the age, we think, of 72.
FRANCE.
Within the last few months not many French works have appeared that claim a special mention in our pages. Among those to which our attention has been drawn we may mention: —
Bungener’s “St. Paul: sa Vie, ses CEuvres et ses Epitres.” Renan’s “St.
Literary Intelligence
[April, 1869
Paul'’ was to appear in March. A. Monod's “ Doctrine Chretienne." A. de Gasparin’s “La Liberte Morale." A. Cocquerel (fils), “Histoire du Credo.” H. Rodrigues, “ La Justice du Dieu.” E. Lambert, " La Deluge mosai'que l’His- toire et la Geologie.” A. Reville, “ Ilistoire du dogme de la divinite de Jesus- Christ.” F. de Saulcy, “ Etude chronologique des livres d’Esdras et de Nehe- mie.” A. Maurel, “ L’Eglise et le souverain pontife.” Gousset, “ Exposition des prineipes du droit c-anonique.” Jacolliot, “ La Bible dans l’Inde.” Petitalot, “ La Yierge mere, d'apres la theologie.” Y. Guichard, “ La Liberte de Penser. Fin du pouvoir spirituel.” E. Castan, “Du progres dans ses rapports avec l’Eglise.” E. Xaville, " Le probleme du mal." Ch. Renouvier, “Science de la morale.’’ Fcrraz, “ Philosophic du devoir.” Hebert-Desrocquettes, “ Notice historique sur le roi TIerode. eta” L. Leger. “Cyrille et Methode. Etudes liistoriques sur la conversion des Slaves au Christianisme.” Rathgeber, “ Spener et le Reveil religieux de son epoque.” Dumesnil, “ Histoire de Sixte Quint, sa Yie et son Ponlificat.” Hermiugard, “ Correspondence des Reformateurs dans les Pays de langue Fran^-ais, Tome II, 1 527—15:12.” D’Haussonville, “L’E- glise Romaine et le premier Empire (lSOO-lSlA.” Tome III. Peyrat, “His* toire des pasteurs du desert, depuis la revocation de l’Edit de Nantes.” Clavel, “ Arnauld de Brescia, et les Romains du 12eme Siecle.” E. Arnaud, “ La Pales- tine ancienne et moderne, ou Giographie historique et physique de la Terre Sainte.” Y. Guerin. “ Description Geographique, historique et archeologique de la Palestine.” C. Malan (the well-known Calvinist pastor of Geneva), “ Sa vie et ses travaux.” A. de Broglie, “ Etudes de Literature et de Morale.” T. H. Martin, “ Les Sciences et la Philosophic.” Roaldis, ” Les penseurs du jour et Arislote.” Secretain, “ Precis elementaire de philosophic.” Bertulus, "Econo mic sociale. L’atheisme du XLXeme Siecle devant l’histoire, la philosophie medicale et 1 humauite." Coulanges, “ La cite antique. Etude sur le Culte, le Droit, les Institutions de la Grece et de Rome.” (Highly recommended.) Ler- mina, “ Histoire de la misere. ou le proletariat a travers les ages.” Delorme,
Cesar et ses contemporains. essai sur les moeurs’des Romains, etc.” Lenormant, “ Manuel d'Histoire ancienne de l’Orient jusqu’aux Guerres mediqnes.” (Yery warmly commended, as superior to any other work in the same line. It is also made to a great extent the basis of Busch’s “ Abriss der Urgeschichte des Orients.’) Taine’s last work is his “Philosophie de l’Art dans les Pays Bas." Faugere has brought out his “ Defense de Blaise Pascal, etc.” against M. Chasles. Beule, “ Histoire de l’Art grecavaut Pericles.” Burnouf, “ Histoire de lalittera- ture grecque.” E. Dumeril, " Histoire de la Come'die,” (Part II.) A. Royer,
Histoire universelle de Theatre” (the first two volumes of five or six). Chai- gnet, “ Yie de Socrate.” Becq de Fouquieres, “ Les jeux des anciens, leur description, leur origine, etc.” Yt'quesnel, "Recherches liistoriques et poliliques sur les pcuples Slaves.
Barlhelemy St. Hilaire has just brought out a new translation of the Iliad in French verse.
A very valuable work in illustration of Homer, going far to establish his minute historical accuracy, is Xicolaides, “ Topographic et Plan Strategique de l’lliade.” The author is a Cretan scholar.
Those who put no high estimate on Renan’s reconstructions of the New Testameut may as scholars value his “ Rapport sur le progres de la littcrature orientale. et sur les ouvrages relatifs a l'Orient, de juillet, 1SG5, a juillet, 1863.”
|
$ |