The Biblical repository and classical review

Google

This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project

to make the world's books discoverable online.

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject

to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books

are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover.

Marks, notations and other maiginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the

publisher to a library and finally to you.

Usage guidelines

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing tliis resource, we liave taken steps to
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying.
We also ask that you:

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for
personal, non-commercial purposes.

+ Refrain fivm automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help.

+ Maintain attributionTht GoogXt "watermark" you see on each file is essential for in forming people about this project and helping them find
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it.

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liabili^ can be quite severe.

About Google Book Search

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web

at|http: //books .google .com/I

., . I

•'' -y..

^A

r

general library
—op-
University OF Michigan.

1

L

. fiL4t#>S??r.. -^.IWi^f^

' '^>j'

■\^iM

;/^

'

•».

>

■'^v^V

^ 4

•,: ' */(

'^''^'■'^

■''#*« y

^- k.

3^
\

AMERICAN

H1^6 2L.

BIBLICAL REPOSITORY

COVDVCTXD

BY ABSALOM PETERS, D. D.

/ -»•»-*

VOLUME EIiEVENTH— NUMBERS XXIX, XXX.

NEW YORK:

GOULD & NEWMAN, PUBLISHERS AND PRINTERS,

BOSTON:

YBXSmS ft HABVm AND CBOCKER ft BREWSTEB.

1838.

CONTENTS OF VOL- XI.

yO. XXIX.

Page*
Art. I. The Historical avd
Geological Deluges Com-
pared. By ProL Hitchcock, 1

Art. II. The Utilitt of the .
Studt of the Classics to
Theological Students. By
J.Packard, .... 28

Art. IU. Literary Impostures.
By D. Foadick, Jr. . . .39

Art. IV. The Adtavcement
OF Biblical Knowledge. By
Prof. E. P.Barrowa, . . 60

Art. V. On the Nature of In-
stinct. By Samuel Fiah, M.
D. Boston, . . .74

Art. VI. Fraternal Appeal
to the American Churches,
together with a Plan for
Catholic Union on Apostol-
' ic Principles. Bj Prof. S. S.
Schmocker, ... .86

Art. Vlf. The Hebrew Ten-
ses. Translation of Ewald,
with remarkfl, by Mw Stuart, 131
Syntax of the Verb, . .134

Of the two Modes with Vav rela-
tive or conversive, the two re-
lative historic forms, . .137
Vav relative with the second

Mode, . . . .137

Vav relative with the first Mode, 141
Participle or relative Tense, . 143
Remarks, by the Translator, . 146

Page.
Art. VIII. Public Libraries.
By Prof. R. B. Patton, . . 174

Art< IX. Design of Theolo-
gical Seminaries. By Prof.
L. P. Hickok, ... 187

Art. X. On the Infre^uenct
OF THE Allusions to Chris-
tianity IN Greek and Ro-
man Writers. Translated
from the Latin of H . T. Tschir-
ner, by Prof. H. B. Hackett, 203

Art. XL Connection of the
Old and New Testaments.
Translated from the German
of Prof. Twesten, of Berlin, by
Prof. B. B. Edwards, . . S33

Art. Xn. Critical Notices, 345

1. Union Bible Dictionary, 245

2. Works of Henry Hallam, 247

3. James's Christian Professor, 253

4. Outlines of a History of the

Court of Rome, . 254

5. Wayland's Political Econo-

my, abridged, . . 257

6. Principles of Interpreting

the Prophecies, . 257

7. Works of Joseph Addison, 257

8. The Toung^ Disciple, . 259

9. Religious Dissensions^ 259

10. Noyes's Hebrew Prophets, 260

11. The Family Preacher, . 261

12. A Mother's Request, < 261

Art. XIII. Select Literary
AND Miscellaneous Intelli-
gence, 263

COKTENTS OF VOLUlfC XI.

NO-

Page.
Art. I. TkfE Eyideitces or the

OfiVUlJfBNESfl OF THE Goft-
PEZ.»y ET AkDREWS NoRTOH.

VoL I. Reviewed by M. Staart 265

Art. II. The Head or the
Church, Head oter aix

TBINGB ; n.LU&rRAT£D BY A-
NAtOOISS BETWEEN NaTURE, '

Providence, and Grace. By
Prof. W. S. Tyler, Amherst
College, . . . • 344

Art. 111. Fraternal Appeal

TO THE Am ERIC AH ChUBCUBS,
TOGETHER WITH A PlAN FOR

Catholic Union on Apos*
tolic Principles. Oonclnded
from p. 131. By Prof. S. S.
Schmacker, .... 3G3
The Apostolic Protestant Con-
fession, ..... 408

I. The Apostles' Creed, . . 409

II. The United Protestant Con-
fession, . * . . . 409

Jdode of Operation, . .414

Art. IV. Causes or the De-
nial OF THE Mosaic Origin
OF the Pentateuch. Trans-
• lated from the German of Prof.
Hengstenberg of Berlin, by
Rev. £. Ballantine, . .416
Introductory Notice, . . 416
Shallow and Skeptical Interpre-
tation, . . ... . 418

Historical Skepticism, . . 435
Judgment of late HistQi'ians, . 440

Art. V. What were the Views

ENTERTAINED BT THE EaRLT

Reformers on the Doctrine
OF Justification, Faith, and

Pago.
the Active Obedience of
Christ ? By Rev, R. W. Lan-
dis, JeiTersonviHe, Pa. . . * 448
Introduction, .... 448
§ 1. Views entertained bj the
Reformers on the doctrine of
Justification, . 453

Art. VI. HEBREW Iobxicogra-
PBT. Review of J. H. R. Bie-
Benthafs <* HebrSiseheif und
chaldaisch^s Schulwdrterbuch
Ober das alte Testament" — and
Prof. W. L. Roy*s *< Complete
Hebrew and English Critical
and Pronouncing Dictionary, ,

. oh a New and Improved Plan."
By Prof. I« Nordheimer. . 486

Art. Vn. Critical Notices, 503
. 1. Dayontiie Will, . . 503

2. Sin against the Holy Ghost, 506

3. Schmuoker on the Reform-

ation, . . . 507

4. A New Tribute to the Mem-

ory of J. B. Taylor, . 508

5. Steedman's South Africa, 509

6. Anglo-Saxon Dictionary, 609

7. Letters from the W. Indies, 512

8. Works of Charles Lamb, 512

9. .Way land on Responsibility, 513

10. Works of WiUiam Cowper, 514

11. Palfrey on the Jewish Scrip- •

tures and Antiquities, . 515

12. Prof. Stowe's Report on Ed-

ucation in £urope, . . 517

13. Ferdinand and Isabella, . 513

14. Autiquitates Amcricanae, . 520

15. Foreign Standard Literature, 519

Art. VIII. Select Literart
AKD Miscellaneous Intelli-
OENCS, ....'. 522

THE

AMERICAN

BIBLICAL REPOSITORY.

NO. XXIX.

JANUARY, 1838.

ARTICLE I.
The Historical and Geological Deluges Compared.

By Edward Hitchcock, Prof, of Cbem. and Nat. Hist. Amfaerat Collage.

[CoDcludad from p. 374. Vol. X.]

There is one other branch of the argument for a deluge
iiom diluvial phenomena, which we must not pass in entire
silence. It is derived from an examination of the contents of
certain caverns and fissures. We can, however, give but a very
brief view of it ; although to make it well understood, requires
a volume. And happily that volume has been written. We
refer to Dr. Buckland's Reliquiae Diluvianae.^

* Id tlie Repository for January 1837, we expressed doubts as to
what were the real opinions of Dr. Buckland at present respecting the
geological evidence of a deluge ; or rather, how far his opinions, as
given in bis Reliquiae, had been modified. On receiving his Bridge-
water Treatise, we found that he had not abandoned the opinion that
there has been a recent inundation of the earth, as shown by geology :
but he doubts whether its identity with the Noachian deluge can be
made out The following are his views — ''The evidence which 1
have collected in my Reliquiae Diluvianae, 1823, shows that one of
the last great physical events that have affected the surface of our
globe was a violent inundation which overwhelmed a great part of the
northern hemisphere, and that this event was followed by the sudden
disappearance of a large number of the species of terrestrial quadni-

VoL. XL No. 29. I

2 Historical and Geological Deluges. [Jan.

In 1821, the attention of Dr. Buckland was called to the
contents of a cavern in limestone, in Yorkshire, that had recent-
ly been opened and found to contain numerous peculiar bones.
He found this cavern to contain on its floor the following sub-
stances. At the bottom was a coating of stalagmite, or concre-
ted limestone, that had dripped from the roof; then succeeded
a layer of mud, which contained, as did also the stalagmite be-
neath it, numerous fragments of the bones of animals, most of
them extinct. Above the mud was a second layer of stalag-
mite, destitute of bones ; and the cavern appeared to have been
closed since the period when the mud was introduced ; the
lower stalagmite having been deposited previous to that time^
and the upper stalagmite subsequently. More than twenty
species of animals were made out from these relics ; and they
were mostly tropical animals. From all the facts in the case,
which were examined with great care by Prof. Buckland, he
made several very important inferences : First, that this cave

peds, which had inhabited these regions in the period immediately
preceding it. I also ventured to apply the name Diluvium, to the
superficial beds of gravel, clay and sand which appear to have been
firoduced by this great irruption of water. The description of the
facts that form the evidence presented in this volume, is kept distinct
from the question of the identity of the event attested by them, with
any deluge recorded in history. Discoveries which have been made,
since the publication of this work, show that many of the animals
therein described, existed during more than one geological period
preceding the catastrophe by which they were extirpated. Hence it
seems more probable, that the event in question was the last of the
many geological revolutions that have been produced by violent irrup-
tions of water, rather than the comparatively tranquil inundation de-
scribed in the Inspired Narrative. It has been justly argued, against
the attempt to identify these two great historical and natural phe-
nomena, that as the rise and fall of the waters of the Mosaic deluge
are described to have been gradual, and of short duration, they would
have produced comparatively little change on the surface of the coun-
try they overflowed. The large preponderance of extinct species
among the animals we find in caves, and in superficial deposits of
diluvium, and the new discovery of human bones along with them
afiford other strong reasons for referring these species to a period an-
terior to the creation of man. This important point however cannot
be considered as completely settled, till more detaiied investigations of
the newest members of the Pliocene, and of the diluvial and alluvial
formations shall have taken place.** BridgtwaUr TrecUise, p. 94, JVbte.
Loiid^, 1836.

1838.] Histcrical and Oeologieal Deluges. 3

for a long time previous to the bringing in of the layer of mud,
was the abode of hyenas, which dragged in thither the bones of
other animals for their food. Secondly, that the mud was in-
troduced by some general flood, and not by local inundations.
Thirdly, that since the introduction of the mud, a considerably
long period roust hav^ elapsed during which the upper layer of
stalagmite was formed. Fourthly, that numerous tropical ani-
mals inhabited England at the period immediately preceding
this inundation. Fifthly, that these became extinct at that time.
By examining other similar caves and fissures in England and
on the continent, he was able to add, Sixthly, that the period of
the introduction of the mud corresponded with the epoch at
which diluvium was deposited all over the world ; and. Sev-
enthly, that man did not probably exist in Europe previous to
that period ; since none of his remains have been found there in
diluvium; though more recently some of the French geologists
have maintained that human remains occur in such circumstan-
ces as to indicate tliat man must have been contemporary with
elephants, hyenas, etc. But Dr. Buckland, in his recent Bridge-
water Treatise, still maintains that ^* no conclusion is more fully
established than the important fact of the total absence of any
vestiges of the human species throughout the entire series of
geological formations."* Finally, it was inferred fix)m the facts
respecting the caverns and fissures, that the sea and land did
not change places at the last deluge ; that is, the antediluvian
continents did not then sink down, and the post-diluvian conti-
nents rise, as has been fi-equently imagined.

These conclusions, we are aware, have been assailed from all
quarters ; and we observe that not many geological writers seem
now disposed to admit them in their full extent. Perhaps, indeed,
Dr. Buckland made some inferences which the facts more tho-
roughly understood will not justify. And he also attempted to
identify the deluge that filled the caverns and fissures with that
of Noah ; a point which he has himself since abandoned. But
viewing the facts as indicative of a deluge, and not of the
Mosaic deluge, we have never seen any refutation of the gen-
eral conclusions that we have stated above. Indeed, they cor-
respond well with similar facts taught by other parts of geology,
and a presumption is thereby created in favor of their truth.
Taken independently of the other phenomena of diluvium^

* Bridgewater Treatise, Vol. I. p. 103. London, 1836.

4 Historical and Geological Deluges* [Jan.

which we have detailed, we doubt whether this antediluvian
chamel house could have given us so clear an msight into the
early history of our globe. Nor has Dr. Buckland attempted
to separate the two classes of phenomena ; and until we meet
with stronger objections than any we have yet seen, we must
regard his history of the contents of caves and fissures as an in-
teresting branch of diluvial agency on the globe.

We have thus endeavored to present a somewhat extended
view of the argument furnished by geology, and derived chiefly
from our own country in proof of an extensive if not universal
deluge in comparatively modem times. We freely confess that
we cannot explain the phenomena in any other way, than by
admitting the occurrence of such a catastrophe. But we have
no disposition to be dogmatical on the subject ; and we have
endeavored to show that the denial of any such deluge does not
bring us at all into collision with the inspired history. But ad-
mitting such a deluge, is it, or is it not identical with that de-
scribed by Moses? On this point we shall be still less disposed
to dogmatize. Yet we will present our readers with the argu-
ments in favor of their identity, as well as with those opposed
to it.

In the first place, the deluges of geology and of Scripture
agree in being comparatively recent. We know the date of the
latter ; but though geology has left on imperishable monuments
the traces of many distinct epochs, it tells us of few chronologi-
cal dates. Hence we can only compare the diluvial epoch with
those that preceded it. And with the exception of the modem
epoch, that is the commencement of the deposition of alluvium,
the time when diluvium was deposited was the last of these
epochs. It might indeed have been earlier than the date of
Noali's deluge : yet we have m another place presented argu-
ments to prove that it could not have been excessively remote.
And until it can be proved that it was more remote than the
flood described by Moses, why should he give it a gratuitous
antiquity that we might not identify it with the latter ? Tme
philosophy, it seems to us, ought to regard them as synchronous
until very strong evidence be presented to the contrary.

Secondly, the two deluges agree together in being of great
extent. We do not say, m being universal, because it may be
doubted and often has been, in regard to each of them, whether
they were so. We think we have shown that the geological
deluge extended over a large part of the northern hemisphere :

1838.] Historical and Geological Deluges. 5

but the tropical and southern parts of the globe have not bad
their diluvial phenomena examined with care enough to enable
us to decide whether this deluge extended so far. Yet from
the powerful waves produced at a great distance by earthquakes
beneath the ocean, it is difficult to conceive how a torrent of
water should rush over the northern hemisphere, or even over
the northern parts of America, without inundadng by its direct
or reflex action aU other parts of the globe. We prefer, how-
ever, to speak of the last geological deluge as being extensive,
rather than universal, until direct evidence be furnished of its
being coextensive with the globe.

As to the extent of the Noachian deluge, the language of
Scripture seems at first view to be very decided : And the wQ'
ters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth ; and all the high
hiUs thai were under the whole heaven were covered. Alike
universal are the terms employed repeatedly to denote the de-
struction of animals upon the earth : And behold J, even J, do
bring a ilood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh,
wherein u the breath of life, from under heaven; and every
thing that is in the earth shall die. In spite of these strong
expressions, not a few able writers have understood them as
simply universal terms with a limited meaning. Of such cases
numerous examples might be quoted in the sacred records.
Thus, in Gen. 41: 57, it is said, that aU countries came into
Egypt to Joseph to buy com, because that the famine was sore
in all lands. Here we have reason to suppose that only the
well known countries around Egypt are meant. Again, 1
Kings 10: 24 : And all the earth sought to Solomon to hear
his unsdom: that is, doubtless, his rame was very extensive,
and many sought to him, but not literally the whole earth.
We have also a case in point in Deut. 2: 25 : This day I wiU
begin to put the dread of thee and the fear of thee upon the
nations that are under the whole heavens, who shall hear report
of thee, and shall tremble, and be in anguish became of thee.
An analogous case is that of the animals shown to Peter in vi-
sion, let down in ^^ a certain vessel," wherein were all manner
of four-footed beasts of the earth, and wild beasts and creep*
tng things, and fowls of the air, ^Acts 10: 12.) Who will
imagine that all the quadrupeds, reptues, and birds on the globe,
were here shown to the apostle ? Is it not clear that this is an
example of the principle stated by Aristotle : to fig navug aV-
tl noXXoi nata fiituipogar eip9;ra», '^ aU is said metaphorically

6 Historical and Oeological Deluges, [Jan.

for many 7" We might quote here the declaration of Paul to the
Colossians (Col. 1: 23) wherein he speaks of the Oospel which
was preached to every creature which is under heaven. No
one can suppose that the apostle meant that the Gospel had in
that day been literally preached to every creature under hea-
ven : for every reader must have known the contrary to be
true. But it had been preached very extensively ; and thus
would every reader understand it ; so conformable was the mode
of expression to the idiom of the Bible, and indeed of all lan-
guages. " The Jews," says Michaelis, " have well observed,
that bb , ally every, is not to be understood, on all occasions,
with the mathematical sense of all; because, it is^also used to
signify many." The same is true of the Greek nae^ the Latin
omniSf the English aUy etc. Even in the description of the
flood in Genesis there is one of these universal terms employed,
whose meaning we are obliged to limit. It was commanded to
Noah — of every living thing of all flesh, pairs of every sort,
shalt thou bring into the ark to Jceep them alive. Here we
must limit the term all flesh, to such animals as needed a shel-
ter from the cataclysm. Most writers on the Scriptures are now
willing to admit that not even pairs of all the land animals,
amounting it is now well known to several hundred thousand,
were collected from every part of the earth into the ark. Even
Granville Penn, in his severe strictures upon geology, as he
understands it, or rather as he misunderstands it, takes this ground.
But the younger Rosenmiiller very justly contends, that if
the universality in respect to the animals saved in the ark be
given up, so must the universality in respect to its extent : that
is, if we may limit the terms in the one case, we may in the
o^er.

Such has been the conclusion of many able commentators.
" It is evident," says bishop Stillingfleet, " that the flood was
universal as to mankind ; but from thence follows no necessity
at all of asserting the universality of it as to the globe of the
earth, unless it be sufficiently proved that the whole earth was
peopled before the flood." (Orig. Sacr. Book 3. chap. 4.)
" Cfonsentiunt quidem omnes, says Le Clerc, " diluvium
universale iiiisse, quatenus totum orbem babitatum oppressit,
universumque humanum genus, exempta Noachi familia, eo
interiit. At alii volunt totum telluris globum aquis obrutum
fuisse, quod alii negant." " Non putandum est," says Poole
in bis oynopsis, "totum terrae glc^um aquis tectum fuisse.

1838.] Historical and Geological Dehigei. 7

Quid opus erat iUas mergere terras, ubi homines non erant ?
Licet ergo credamus ne centissiroam quidem orbis partem aquis
fuisse obrutam, erit nihilomious diluvium universale, quia clades
totum orbem oppressit." " Num diluvium totum terrarum or-
bem inundavit," says Dathe, ^^ an regiones tan turn eo tempore
babitatas dissentiunt interpretes. Ego quidem facio cum his,
qui posterioram sententiam defendunt — vocabulum omnis, non
probat inundationem fuisse universalem. Constet multis in
locis y^ intelligendum esse tantum de re, sive loco de quo agi-
tur, Cap. 2: 19,20. Ezek. 31:6. Igitur omnia aninudwy
in navem intromissa sunt earum regionum, quae aquis inundan-
dae. Sic quoque de moniibus sentiendum est, quos aquae su-
peraverunt."*

We doubt, therefore, whether the language of Moses requires
us to admit that he meant to impute an universality to the de-
luge coextensive with the earth. But if it be a fact that the
ark did rest upon the summit of the present mount Ararat, in
Armenia, and that the waters rose fifteen cubits above that level,
we can hardly conceive it possible that so mighty a wave should
not sweep ovei the whole globe, either in its flux or reflux*
For according to the recent observations of professor Parrot,
that mountain is 15,219 English feet above the ocean. There
are two suggestions, however, that may throw some doubt over
this conclusion. Some authors do not think it certain that the
present mount Ararat is the Ararat (ts'inM) on which the ark
rested. "The stream of interpreters," says Mr. Kirby, "an-
cient and modem, place this mountain in Armenia ; but Shuck-
ford, after Sir Walter Raleigh, seems to think that Ararat was
further to the east and belonged to the great range anciently
called Caucasus and Imaus, which terminates in the Himmaleh
mountains to the north of India. This opinion seems to receive
some confirmation from Scripture, for it is said, as they journey^
edfrom the easty they found a plain in the land of Shinar.
Now the Armenian Ararat is to the north of Babylonia, where-
as the Indian is to the east.^f Mr. Kirby quotes also the tra-
dition prevalent in India that the ark was moored at first to the
Himmaleh, and he considers its superior height as correspond-
ing better than that of Ararat with the long period of ten weeks
that intervened after the ark first rested, before the tops of other

* Pentateuchus a Dathio, p. 63.

t Bridgewater Treatise, p. 35. Philad. 1836.

8 Historical and Geological Deluget. [Jan.

mountains were seen. These arguments are not perhaps suffi-
cient to overweigh the almost universal testimony of antiquity ;
yet they are not without weight. We venture to make another
suggestion. Is it certain that the ark rested upon the highest
summit of Ararat ? The language of Moses does not surely
teach that such was the fact ; for he merely states that the ark
rested upon the mountains of Ararat, or Armenia (t3^*3« '^'yn b9 ,
Gen. 8: 4\ And we might presume that the place of de-
scent would be chosen by God jn a convenient spot for reach-
ing the plain below ; whereas the summit of Ararat is so diffi-
cult of ascent, that not until A. D., 1829, did man suc-
ceed in setting his foot upon it. So that nothing but a mir-
acle could have enabled the men and animals preserved in the
ark to descend in safety. We confess that the point where the
ark rested must have been very elevated, because we find it to
have been ten weeks afterwards before the tops of other moun-
tains began to appear, although the waters were continually de-
creasing.

If we mistake not, then, the deluges of Scripture and of geol-
ogy, may, or may not, have been universal, in consistency with
the language of the sacred history, and with the facts of science
as they are at present understood. They agree, therefore, in
having been very extensive, if not universal. And in view of
such proo£i of their identity, it should require decisive evidence
to the contrary to disjoin them. The following are the principal
objections to this identity.

1. The great preponderance of extinct species of organic
beings in diluvium. Some of these species appear to have ex-
isted through several geological periods anterior to the diluvial
epoch. Now it is known that the more unlike existing animals
and plants are to the remains of those in a particular formation,
the more ancient do we conclude that formation to be. On the
same principle, the presumption is rather in favor of placing the
last aqueous catastrophe which geology describes at a period
earlier than man's creation.

2. No human remains are found in diluvium. If man had
existed and in great numbers, there seems no reason why his
remsuns should not occur along with those of other animals.
There is no way to avoid this conclusion but by supposing the
antediluvians to have been limited to central Asia, whose dilu-
vium has been as yet little explored.

3. The period occupied by the Mosaic deluge was too short

1888.] Mttoricd and Geologiad Dehige$. 9

to have produced the diluvial phenomena iK^bich geology eihi*
bits* We confess we have been deeply impressed with this
objection, when witnessing the powerful denuding effects of the
the last geological cataclysm. It is not merely the vast accu*
mulations of diluvium, nor the smoothed and fiirrowed aspect
of the hardest rocks, that have seemed to demand more time
than the year of the Noachian deluge ; but the scooping out of
vallies, and that too of considerable depth, and in solid rock.
True, there are distinct marks of a power and violence in the
diluvian waters of which we see no examples at present in
aqueous currents ; and we feel at a loss to determine bow much
more rapidly this unknown increase of power might have accom-
plbhed the work of denudation. We ought to recollect too,
that when we look upon a valley through which a powerfiil
current of water has rushed, we are not generally able to deter-
mine whether that current has formed the whole valley, or only
given it its last form. Another circumstance, also, has struck
us as indicating that even the geologk^l deluge did not occupy
an immense period. Along the rocky banks of existing rivers,
we have almost alwajrs found more or less of those excavations
in the rocks called pot holes, produced by the long continued
gyratory motion of pebbles in a cavity. But distinct as are the
marks of the diluvial waters, we never saw any of these peculiar
excavations. And we cannot but impute their non-existence
to the want of sulfficient time during the cataclysm.

Upon the whole, the arguments against the identity of the
two deluges appear to us rather to preponderate. ^' This impor-
tant pomt, however,'^ to use the language of Dr. Buckland,
*^ cannot be considered as completely settled, till more detailed
investigations of the newest members of the Pliocene, and of
the diluvial and alluvial formations shall have taken place."*
We feel no great anxiety how this question is settled, as to its
bearing upon revelation. But examined in the true spirit of
the Baconian philosophy, it seems to us that there is quite too
much evidence of the identity of the two deluges, and quite too
much ignorance of the whole subject of diluvium yet remaining,
to permit an impartial geologist to decide peremptorily, as some
have done, that they could not have been contemporaneous*
We rather prefer that state of mind in which the judgment re-
mains undecided, waiting for further light. Meanwhile it is

* Bridgewater Treatise, p. 95. Vol. I. Londoo, 1636.
Vol. XI. No. 29. 2

10 Historical and Oeological Deluges. [J ait.

sufficient, so far as revelation is concerned, to have shown that
no presumption is derived from geology against the truth of
Moses's history of the deluge ; but rather a presumption in its
favor even on the most unfavorable supposition.

3. We now proceed, as the third general branch of our *uJ-
ject, to consider the most important objections derived from
geology and natural history, against the truth of the Mosaic
history of the deluge.

Not many years since, it was thought by the skeptical, that
civil history furnished many facts inconsistent with the recent
date of the Noachian deluge. The archives and traditions of
Assyria, Egypt, and China, the Hindoo astronomical tables,
and the Zodiacs of Denderah and Esneh, were mustered for
battle with the Bible. The shout of victory, on the part of infi-
delity, rung loudly before the tug of the war had come. And
it was not so much Christians who stood up in defence of the
Bible, as it was men, who with little regard for the Scriptures,
were yet friends to fair examination. Before the magic scru-
tiny of such minds, the hoary aspect of these vaunted relics dis-
appeared, and strong confirmation of the Mosaic chronology was
the result. So that it is no longer necessary to go into a labored
refutation of the extravagant chronologies of semi-barbarous na-
tions, nor of their supposititious astronomical epochs.* Many
of the objections to the Mosaic chronology, derived from sci-
ence, also, now that the subjects are better understood, have
ceased to be adduced by intelligent infidels ; but we must briefly
refer to some, which, by those not thoroughly acquainted with
science, are still occasionally adduced in opposition to the au-
thority of Moses.

1. It has been thought that certain natural processes now
going on, must have had an earlier commencement than the
date of the Noachian deluge. .

It is hardly necessary here to refer to the seven lava beds,
said to exist around Mount Etna, with a rich stratum of soil, or
decomposed lava, between each of them ; and each of which
it was supposed must have demanded at least 2000 years for
its formation and decomposition. For it now appears that the
supposed decomposed surface is nothing but a ferruginous tufa,

* By far the best view of these subjects which we have seen ia
contained ia the iaterestiog Lectures of Dr. Wiseman on the Connec-
tion between Science and Revelation, recently republished at Andover.

1838.] Historical and Geological Deluges. 1 1

which is often produced at the beginning or end of a vdcanic
eruption ; and, therefore, these successive beds of lava might
have been produced in as many years.

The gorge or ravine, 200 feet deep and seven miles long,
between Niagara Falls and Lake Ontario, has long been thought
to require an immense period for its excavation ; at least 10,000
years. Admitting this to be true, we do not see how it clashes
with the chronology of Moses^ according to the view which
most christian geologists take of the creation of the world.
For why may not that excavation have commenced anterior to
the deluge ; nay, before the six days of creation ? Nearly all
real geologists now believe that our continents remain essentially
the same as they were before the deluge ; so that antediluvian
processes of excavation might have been resumed in the postdi-
luvian period. But there is another and probably a better mode
of meeting this difficulty. Prof. Rogers, as we have seen,
(p. 346, No. 28,) supposes that Uie trough below the falls may have
been commenced by diluvial agency ; and that the waters of the
lake have only modified it and are slowly extending it southerly.
The fact that this trough lies in a north and south direction
favors this suggestion, made as it is by a cautious and able geol-
ogist ; and whoever is familiar with diluvial phenomena, will
see at once that it is extremely probable. According to this
theory all calculations made from the present rate of retrocession
of the falls, will give us no correct results as to the time when
the process began, because we do not know at what point the
abrading process began.

2. Another objection formerly urged with confidence, is, that
it is mathematically impossible for the present oceans of the
globe to be raised so as to cover its whole surface. This would
require several additional oceans to be superimposed upon those
now existing, and from whence could this immense additional
quantity of water have proceeded ; or if miraculously obtained^
what has become of it ?

Some have replied, by considering the whole phenomena of
the flood as miraculous. And a perusal of the scriptural narra-
tive is apt to leave the impression on the mind that such was
the case. But according to the present state of geological sci-
ence, there is no need of resortbg to a miracle to escape firom
this objection. For in the first place, we have endeavored to
show that there is nothing in the Scripture account of the deluge
that requires us to consider it universal, except so far as man

12 Historical and Geological Deluges. [Jan.

dwelt on the globe. But secondly, the sudden elevation of a
continent, or mountain chain, would raise such a wave, as in its
flux and reflux, must overwhelm all the dry land, although all
continents might not be submerged at the same moment. We
have sometimes been almost disposed to believe that this flux
and reflux of the diluvian waters i$ referred to in the ^Vtbi ^ibn
of Gen. 8: 3, and the nioh^. tjitn of Gen. 8: 6, (literally^ in
going and returning and in going and decreasing) but we
suppose that the Hfebrew idiom will not allow that any thing
more is included in these phrases than a continual decrease of
the waters.

3. Some parts of the globe it is said exhibit no marks of diluvial
agency. Chaubard, as already stated, (p. 351 , No. 28,) declares
tlmt erratic blocks or bowlders are wanting in the Pyrenees,
the Appenines, the Carpathian mountains, and the mountains of
Bohemia ; and Mr. Lyell states that he did not find them in
Sicily, nor in Italy, till he approached the foot of the Alps.
Humboldt states, also, that there are no such fragments at the
eastern foot of the equatorial Andes.* Mr. Lyell likewise rep-
resents the cones of extinct volcanoes in central France as
showing no marks of erosion by water.f These facts are not,
however, adduced by these writers to disprove the occuhnence
of such a flood as Moses describes ; but some of them at least
suppose that they show that catastrophe to have been local, not
universal ; or that it was too quiet to leave any permanent
traces of its existence. And if we admit that the Noachian
deluge was not universal, as we have endeavored to show may
be done consistently with the terms of the sacred record, these
statements are no objection to that history. But we may be
permitted to doubt whether they throw any formidable difficulty
in the way of one who contends for the universality and power-
ful action of the Mosaic deluge. For it is very certain that the
force of diluvial currents was greatly modified by local circum-
stances, having been most powerful in mountainous regions,
or where the waters were forced through narrow gorges. Hence
it is easy to conceive, that in some regions those currents might
have been so feeble, as for instance on extensive plains, as to
leave few or no traces. And as to the volcanic cones of central

* Lyell's Annivemary Address before the London Oeol. Society,
1836. p. 32.

t Lor^'b Geology^ Vol. 3. p. 273.

1838.] HitUnicai and Geological Deluges. 13

France, is it certain that they may not have been thrown up
since the time of Noah's flood ? For the earliest historical
records respecting that country, do not reach back within 2000
years of that event. Or if they were antediluvian, is it certain
that the diluvial currents might not have been comparatively
feeble in that region ?

4. The existence and preservation of the dive on mount Ar^-
arat have been regarded as other objections against the Mosaic
account of the deluge. It does not now grow, it is said, in the
vicinity of that mountain, certainly not near its top, which is
covered with perpetual snow. It might be a sufficient replj
to this difficulty, Uiat there has been in all ages not a little di-
versity of opinion as to the situation of the Ararat on which the
ark rested. If the opinion should prove true, that it is really a
part of the Himmaleh range in India, the objection would dia^
appear. But not to resort to this mode of avoiding the difficult
ty, if we regard the sacred and geological deluges as identical^
we have the strongest reason to suppose that at the time of the
latter, there was no small change of the temperature of northern
regions. All the northern part of Asia abounds with the re-
mains of the elej^nt. It is true that one of these animals,
found preserved entire in ice, was covered witfa hair ; and some
have thought that this circumstance proves the animal to have
been an inhabitant of a cold climate. But if it inhabited a cli*
mate as cold as the one now existing there, whence could k
obtain vegetable food ? The truth is, that haity elephants are
now found in the higher and cooler parts of India ; and tuis
shows us, that diough the climate of Siberia when inl»lHted by
these extinct races of elephants was colder tiian the present un»
modified climate of the torid aone, yet it was not much colder.
And hence the antediluvian climate around the present Ararat,
might have been warm enough to have produced the olive.
Indeed, for this purpose very little change was probably neces-
sary ; we mean in the lower parts of Armenia ; since Stvsbo
m«[itions that in his day one part of that <countiy did actuailly
produce die olive.

That a change of climate did take place at the epoch of the
geologbal dduge, is proved very <$onclusiTely from the fo<A
above referred to, of the cHscovery of an entire elephant enoased
in ice on the shores of the Arctic Ocean. (For previous to the
time in which he was oaveloped in the ice, the climate mum,
have been too warm, in eider that sodi an •animail might lire^

14 Historiccd and Geological Deluges. [Jan.

to suppose he was frozen up during the winter so firmly as not
to thaw out again during the summer. But the congelation,
when it took place, was so powerful that the ice remained un-
melted till the beginning of the present century. The change
of climate therefore, must have been sudden and permanent.
Whether the pouring down of the contents of the Arctic Ocean
upon that country might have been a sufficient cause of this
change, we hardly feel prepared to say. That it would pro-
duce as great a change of temperature as we suppose took place,
for the time being, we doubt not. We find it difficult, however,
to conceive that this cause should still continue in operation.
On the whole, beset as the subject is with difficulties, we are
prepared to say little more than that a change of climate did
take place at the epoch of the last geological deluge ; and if
the deluge of Scripture be identical, this fact removes all diffi-
culty respecting the growth of the olive in Armenia. Or, if
they be not identical, what happened at one of these cataclysms^
may have been repeated during the other.

It appears that during the Noachian deluge the olive tree
from which the dove obtained a leaf, was neither uprooted, nor
did it lose its vitality. Hence some have inferred that there
could not have been much violence in the diluvian waters.
But we have only to suppose that particular tree to have stood
in a sheltered situation, and it might have remained unaffected
though the waters raged with great fury around it. As to the
" leaf plucked off," it might have been put forth after the waters
had subsided ; for there was an interval of more than a month
and a half between the time when' the ark first grounded, and
when the dove w^ sent forth the second time. Some have
supposed the olive to have been a new creation, of which we
have reason to suppose there may have been many examples
immediately subsequent to the deluge. But in that case, the
leaf could hardly have been evidence to Noah that the earth
bad become so dry that vegetation had again put forth. Nor
do we see any need of miraculous agency in the case, and
therefore we ought not to admit it without strong proof.

5. Another objection to the Mosaic account of the deluge is,
that pairs of all the animals on the globe could not have been
preserved in the ark. From the days of Celsus, who in refer-
ence to this difficulty denominated the ark mfimtov dXlonoxoPy
the absurd arlcy to the present time, this objection has been urg-
ed as quite unanswerable. And many theologians have made

1838.] Hisiorical and Geological Deluges. 15

great ef&rts to show, by rigid calculation, that there was room
abundant in that vessel for all the animals that would be liable
to be destroyed by a deluge, with provisions for a year. If we
regard the cubit as having been 21.8 inches, according to some
writers, the length of the ark was 547 English feet, its breadth
ninety-one feet, and its height fifty-five feet. But if the cubit
was only a foot and a half, according to the most probable esti-
mate, its length was 450 feet, its breadth seventy-five feet, and
its height forty-five feet. Now such dimensions would perhaps
be sufficient to accommodate pairs of all the animals known to
naturalists in the days of Bufifon ; when they estimated the
number of the mammalia at about 250, and made little account
of other animals. But since more than a thousand quadrupeds
have been described, more than 6000 birds, and more than 100,
000 insects ; and since it is made probable that the actual num-
ber of these classes is at least half a million ;* such calculations
as these have fallen into neglect, and no judicious Christian
likes to rest the authority of Moses upon such uncertain esti-
mates, if there be another mode of meeting this difficulty less
objectionable. And another mode is now generally adopted, even
by writers who aro extremely fearful lest any violence should
be done to the language of Scripture, to accommodate it to the
discoveries of science. They suppose it, as we have already
mentioned in considering the question as to the universality of
the fiood, an example where universal terms are used with a
limited signification. For the command to bring mto the ark
of every living thing of all flesh, pairs of every sort, must, at
any rate, be limited to those animals that live out of water ;
and there would seem to be no reason why a still further limi-
tation of the language is not allowable if there be sufficient rea-
son for it. Now we cannot but believe that the impossibility,
without a constant miracle, of collecting and preserving all ani-
mals firom every part of the world in the ark, as well as the en-
tire uselessness oi doing this, so far as we can see, together wkb
the difficulties resulting fix)m the facts concerning their present
distribution over the earth, (a subject which we shall shortly
consider,) do form a sufficient reason for limiting the language
of Moses to those animals most common and important in the
country where the ark was constructed ; or rather to a sufficient
number of animab to form an impressive memorial to the post-

* Foreign Quarterly Review for April, 1635, p. 90.

16 Hittorical and Oeological Deluges. [Jan.

diluviaDS of so great a catastrophe, and probably also to furnish
them at once, without a miracle, with the necessary domestic
animals. The case seems very analogous to the naming of an-
imals by Adam, when it is said that Adam gave names to aU
cattle and to the fowl of the air. But few commentators
we believe will contend that this is to be understood as zoologi-
cally true. We are not prepared to say that the ark might not
have been large enough to have contained pairs of all the ani-
mals that live out of water ; but to collect them and take care
of them and afterwards to distribute them over the face of tha
earth must have b^en altogether miraculous, and as we do not
see of what use such a miracle could have been, and we know
that God does not put forth a miraculous agency where the ob-
ject can be accomplished by his ordinary operations, we rather
prefer the explanation that supposes universal terms to have
been employed with a limited meaning ; and that only a part of
the species of animals that then existed were preserved in the
ark. As we do not thus violate the principles of interpretation,
and as this exegesis perfectly satisfies the objection, it seems to
us more satisfactory than any other.

6. Finally, it is said that the present distribution of animals
on the globe is incompatiUe with the idea that they ever spread
or migrated from any one point on its surface, as they must have
done if all proceeded finom those preserved b the ark. This is
the most important and plausible objection we have considered ;
and in order fully to appreciate its force, we must date the gen-
eral principles by which the distribution of plants and animals
on the globe has been regulated ;•— « subject, which, until re-
cently, even the ablest naturalists did not understand ; and oon-
eeming which, we apprehend that very vague notions now pre-
vail among die great mass of intelligent men who are not natu-
talists.

In the first place, a considerable number of spedes, both of
animals and plants, are capable of enduring great varieties of
climate, and have in fact migrated over a considerable part of
the globe. Most of the domestic animals, sudi as the ox, the
horse, the dog, and the cat, are of thb description ; being found
in every dimale. Bui some, such as dae camel and the ele*
phant, «re confined to the warmer parts of the earth. Some
plants also accompany man wherever be goes. The plantain^
ibr instance (Plantago major L.) followed the track of the first
settlers of this country so uoinniily, as to be denominated by

1838.] Hiitorical and Oeological Dehtget. 17

Indians, ** English man's foot." It is only a few years since
the flea bane (Erigeron Canadense L.) was first carried to Eu«
rope, and it is now spread over France, Great Britain, Italy,
Sicily, Holland, and Germany. The thorn apple (Datura Stra-
monium L.) originally brought from the East Indies and Abys*
sinia, now grows as a common weed over nearly every part of
Europe and the United States. The seeds of some plants are
fitted to sail on the water, and in this way are driven from con-
tinent to continent. Others have hooks attached to them, so
that they may cling to the hairy coats of animals and be thus
dispersed.

To this migratory class of organized beings, man belongs. It
is easy to conceive how he might have originated in a particu-
lar spot, and in the course of a few ages have been spread over
the globe, as we now find him to be. We are not aware that
any of those naturalists who believe the varieties of men to con-
stitute different species, created in the regions they now occupy,
deny at all the possibility of distribution from one point ; but
they found their opinion upon other considerations.

But in the second place, the greater part of animals and
plants are confined to particular districts oi the globe ; so that
the earth is divided into a large number of distinct zoological
and botanical provinces, each one of which is distinguished by
several peculiar species. The most distinct of these provinces
are separated by wide oceans, or are situated in different zones ;
but sometimes a range of mountains merely forms the dividing
line. The difference between the plants and animals of the
several zones on the globe, has long been well known ; and it
may be supposed that all the peculiarity of any particular zoo-
logical or botanical province depends upon the latitude. But
thjs is not the &ct ; for the productions of countries on different
continents, between the same isothermal lines, do not correspond ;
certainly not as to species. Thus, of the 2891 species of plants
described by Pursh in the United States, only 385 occur m the
temperate parts of Europe. New Holland is remarkable for
the peculiarity of its Fauna and Flora ; the plants and animals
found there being almost without exception different from those
in other parts of the world. So the animals of America are
strikingly different from those of the eastern continent. The
number of zoological provinces on the globe has been estimated
at eleven, and the DecandoUes, father and son, than whom no
better judges can be named, reckon the number of distinct bo-

VoL. XI. No. 29. 3

18 Historical and Oeological Debigei. [Jan.

tanlcal provinces at twenty-seven. This estimate was the result
of an examination of seventy or eighty thousand species.

In the early days of natural history, travellers expected to
find the same animals and plants in distant countries as in their
own ; and often they fancied resemblances where later observa-
tions have shown only a sort of family likeness, but not a spe-
cific identity. Even Linnaeus maintamed that all the species
of animals and plants were originally placed on one fertile spot,
fit>m whence they subsequently migrated, so as to fill the earth.
But the facts of the case were then too imperfectly known to
enable even the strongest and most impartial mind to arrive at
a correct conclusion. Naturalists now almost universally sup-
pose that each species was indigenous to one particular spot,
and that different species were placed in different spots, nom
whence they have spread to a greater or less distance. So that
when they find a species on dmost every part of the globe,
they iinmediately begin to seek out its birth place and the means
of its dispersion.

From these facts we trust our readers will be able to estimate
the force of the objection under consideration. If aU animals
on the face of the globe were destroyed by the deluge, except
those preserved in the ark, then the existing races must have
migrated from the region of Ararat to their present stations in
the remotest parts of the globe. But facts show that with few
exceptions they are confined to particular regions ; and where
we find the same animal in distant spots, we also find it in inter-
mediate places. If all proceeded from one point after the de-
luge, we should have expected to find traces of their exbtence
along the path of their migration. Again, if this dispersion took
place naturally, how could species adapted, as we now see the
greater part are, to a particular climate, have been sustained
while they were gradually moving through regions unpropitious
to them, to that spot for which Providence intended them ?
By what instinct could they have been guided to countries often
several thousand miles distant 7 And especially, how could the
tropical animals of America have reached their present abode,
without passing through the Arctic regions around Behring's
Strait, where such animals could not now survive a week ? And
there are many other cases where the difficulty of transporta-
tion must have been equally great.

To reconcile this objection with the history of Noah's deluge,
as it is usually understood, is, indeed, no easy task ; that is, if

1838.] HUtarical and Oeohgkai Detuges. ] 9

we suppose pairs of all animals on the globe were actuaUy pre-
served in the ark and the deluge was strictly universal. Some,
we know, will cut the knot at once, by imputing the whole to
the miraculous power of God — and we readily admit that this
was sufficient if exerted — but we do not think it necessary to
resort to such an agency in order to vindicate the Scriptures :
and as a resort to miracles rarely satisfies, although it may si-
lence skeptical minds, we shall suggest two hypotheses which
we regard sufficient to meet the difficulty.

In the first place, the deluge may not have been universal.
We have alreaay endeavored to show that the V*pMn*b^ (Gen.
8: 9) over which the waters are said to have flowed, may have
been equivalent to the oixovfuvti of the New Testament ; that
is, the whole world so far as men inhabited it. And if this be
admitted, the animals that existed m remote countries may not
have penshed ; while those saved in the ark fiimisbed the stock
for repeopling the regions which the flood had destroyed. Such
an interpretation has had its advocates, ever since uie days of
Quirini, in 1676 ; and we are confident that it may be main-*
tained without straining or perverting the sacred record at all ;
though we feel some difficulty with it on geological grounds :
that is, we can hardly see why a deluge extensive enough to
overwhelm the outovfitvti, should not sweep over other parts of
the world.

In the second place, a new creation of animals and plants
may have taken place subsequent to the deluge. We admit
that the Scriptures are silent on the subject, and therefore they
leave us free to reason concerning it from philosophical considera*
tions. If it be admitted that the language of Scripture respect-
ing the deluge is to be Umited to the region, probably not ex-
tensive, whbh was occupied by man, and to the animals with
which he was most familiar in those regions, we should not
expect, that in giving an account of what took place after the
deluge, they would describe the animak and plants of other parts
of the world, even if they were then first created : For in this
case, it would have been necessary to communicate a know-
ledge of the geography of the globe ; or in other words, to an-
ticipate future discoveries in that science. And tliis would
have been foreign to the object of revelation, as indeed would '
any account be of the animals and plants of remote regions, or
of oiganic remains in the rocks. It ought also to be recollected,
that the sacred writers use almost the same language to describe

20 HUtoricdl and Oeohgtcai Deluges. [Jait.

the original creation of the matter of the universe, as the succes-
sive production of animab and plants by ordinary generation ;
since they looked upon both as equally the work of God. A
passage in the 104th Psalm will illustrate this idea, (vs. 29, 30) :
jThouhidest thy facey they (animals of every kind) are troubled :
thou takest away their breathy they die and return to their dust.
Thou sendest forth thy Spirit ^ they are created: and thou re-
newest the face of the earth. Now we cannot but see the re-
semblance between this description and that of the original cre-
ation in Genesis. The same Spirit is concerned and the same
word used, viz. e^na . It very well describes, also, those suc-
cessive destructions and renewals of animal races, which geolo-
gists maintain are shown by the history of organic remains, to
have taken place on the globe. Yet commentators generally
suppose that this passage describes only the ordinary destruc-
tion and renewal of the animal races, which is daily taking place
by what are called natural laws.

The inference we wish to make from such facts as these, is,
that even though new species of organized bemgs were from
time to time created, it would not be strange that it should not
be noticed in the Scriptures, if the mention of it did not fall in
directly with the great moral object of the Bible ; since the in-
spired writers would not regard such an exercise of Divine
power as scarcely more illustrative of the perfections of Jehovah,
than the ordinary and continual reproduction of animals and
plants.

Suppose now, that naturalists should find reason to conclude
that new species of animals and plants do occasionally appear on
the globe ; would there be any inconsistency between such a fact
and the Scriptures ? Must we believe that the creation of all
animals and plants, that ever have existed, is described in the
Bible ? We think it almost certain, as we have shown in
another place, (Bibl. Repos. Vol. VI. p. 309,) that the animals
and plants found fossil are not described in Genesis. And nat-
uralists think that there are some cases in which a new species
of animal is introduced in modern times ; as in those instances
where animals or animalculae are found only in some substance
that has been discovered by a chemical process in modern
times.* We do not regard the examples which they cite as
entirely satisfactory : But the' enormous multiplication of the

* Bluinenbach's Manual of Naturul History, p. 27G. London, 1825.

1838.] Hiitarical and Oeohgical Deluges. 21

frogs of Egypt, sometimes mentioned by commentators as an
example of a new creation, seems explicable by natural laws
but with great difficulty. And such examples, in connection
with our previous reasoning, go to take away all improbability
from the conclusion, that there was a new creation immediately
subsequent to the deluge.

Evidence is derived from geology that several catastrophes,
which have in early times taken place on the globe, by which
entire races of organized beings have been destroyed, have been
followed by the creation of new races. Sometimes a few spe-
cies seem to have survived the catastrophe, or have been repro-
duced ; but in general, those created aner the catastrophe have
been different from those destroyed by it. Here then, it seems
to us, we obtain a still stronger presumption that the diluvial
catastrophe described by Moses was followed by an analogous
new creation, so far as it was necessary to repeople the world,
or to adapt organized beings to changes in climate and other
circumstances. The numerous examples of new creations which
Palaeontology iiimishes, show us that such is the law of the
Divine administration.

Another consideration renders still more probable the idea of
a new creation subsequent to the deluge. It does not appear
from the sacred records, that any provision was made in the aik
for the preservation of plants or seeds. Now there are very
many species that would have been entirely destroyed by being
covered with water for a year ; as will be evident to any one
who has noticed how a flood of a few weeks will ruin many
plants on which the water rests. They cannot survive so long
without the access of air. The diluvial waters, therefore, must
have destroyed the germinating principle in numerous instances ;
and unless the postdiluvian flora be more scanty than the ante-
diluvian, as we have no reason to suppose, — these last species
must have been recreated after the waters had retired.

These several circumstances do not prove certainly that such
a creation did take place. But when we connect them with
the fiicts that have been detailed, respecting the present distri-
bution of organized bemgs, which are totally at variance with
their having spread except miraculously from one point, and
when we consider fiirther, that the Scriptures leave us at entire
liberty to suppose such a creation, the hypothesis certainly
appears probable enough to form a satisfactory reply to the
objection under connderation ag^nst the scriptural account de-

22 Hiitarical and Oeotogical Debsget. [Jan.

rived fixHn the present distribution of organized beings. Some,
however, have thought that it would be still more satisfactory
to combine both the hypotheses which we have named. They
would admit a new creation, and also suppose that the deluge
was not universal. We do not feel anxious which of these
three modes of relieving the difficulty is adopted. But one of
them at least seems to us indispensable.

4. It only remains J as the fourth general branch of our sub-
ject y to inquire whether any natural causes could Jiave produced
the deluge.

It is well known, that from the earliest times, writers have
indulged in speculations on the natural causes of this event ;
while to many, such an inquiry seems ahnost sacrilegious ; since
they suppose the deluge to have been strictly miraculous. Had
the sacred writers distinctly informed us that such was the fact,
all philosophical reasoning concerning that event would have
been presumptuous and useless. But since the Bible is silent
on this point, and since we know it to be a general principle in
God's government, not to superadd to natural agencies a mirac-
ulous energy where the former is sufficient to accomplish his
purposes, we are surely at liberty to inquire whether any forces
exist in nature sufficient, by their unaided operation, to produce
such a catastrophe. In giving a history of opinions respecting
the deluge, we have exhibited a variety of hypotheses on this
subject ; but most of them are too evidently baseless to need
a formal examination. We shall therefore mention only those
that are still advanced by respectable writers of the present day.

1. Some impute the deluge to the approximation of a comet
to thQ earth, or to an actual appulse of the two bodies. On
this hypothesis it is not necessary to add any thing to what we
have stated in giving the history of opinions concerning the
deluge, (Bibl. Repos. Jan. 1837. p. 107.") The &ct, now well
ascertained, that the comets are not solid bodies, and for the
most part are only very attenuated vapor, certainly renders this
hypothesis entirely untenable. And we can explain the circum-
stance that some writers still cling to it, only by supposing them
ignorant of the facts, or strangely perverted in their judgments
by the influence of hypothesis.

2. Some suppose that the deluge was caused by the sinking
down of the antediluvian continents beneath the ocean, and the
elevation of our present continents above the waters. Such an
event would, indeed, produce a complete and universal deluge ;

1888.] ESstarical and Oeologicd Beluga. 33

and a certain class of writers, as we have seen in a former num-
ber of this work, (Bibl. Repos. Jan. 1837. p. 106,) maintain
this theory with great confidence. They are writers who are
greatly scandalized by the effi}rts of geologists to show that a
long interval may have elapsed, undescribed, between the
' beginning' and the six days of creation, lest too great latitude
of interpretation should thus be allowed in biblical exegesis.
And yet this hypothesis of theirs requires them to admit, con-
trary to what every child sees to be the troth in readmg the
Bible, that the waters of the flood did not first rise over the land
and then subside, leaving the same land dry ; but that the land
sunk down, which brought over it the ocean, and that other
contbents rose in other parts of the globe to form new habita*
tbns for organized beings. Hence they must further admit, that
there must at that time have been an entirely new creation bf
plants and many animals. Also, that the description of the
garden of Eden in Genesis is not a part of the Bible, but an in-
terndation ! Surely, men who can take such liberties as this
with the Bible, where its language is plain and simple, should
be cautious in condemning others for a more liberal interpreta-
tion of some passages which have always perplexed the critic.
And further, tnis supposed bterchange of land and water at the
epoch of the last deluge, is contrary to many facts in geology ;
such as for instance, the occurrence of the remains of land ani-
mals on all existing continents, imbedded in the higher strata*
Tertiary deposites also, are frequent whose strata are hc^zontal,
and whose level therefore cannot have been essentially altered
since their deposition ; for otherwise they would have been
tilted up. Yet these depositee were made anterior to the last
geological deluge, because its relics are strowed over them*
But in giving a history of this subject, we have already entered
so fiiDy into the arguments respecting this hypothesis, that we
forbear lest we should be repetitious.

3. Another hypothesis imputes the deluge to the sudden
elevation of the bottom of the ocean, so as to throw its waters
over a part, if not the whole, of existing continents. No fact
is moie generally admitted, by those conversant with geology,
than that our present continents once constituted the bottom of
the ocean, ana that almost equally certain is it, that difierent
continents and difierent parts of^the same continent, were eleva-
ted above the waters at different epochs. A distinguished French
geologist, who has paid much attention to this point, thinks he

34 Historical and Geological Deluges* [Jan.

can distinguish as many as twelve of these epochs among the
rocks of Europe, and there are several obvious in this country.
It is generally admitted, also, that these elevations took place
suddenly ; that is, they resulted from a paroxysm of internal
power. Let us now imagine a continent, or even a single
mountain chain, to be raised fiom the ocean's depths in a few
days, or a few weeks. There can be no doubt but the waters
would be driven in mighty waves over those continents, or at
least over that part of them which was previously above the
waters. Suppose, for example, that the bed of the northern
ocean were to be thus lifted up over a vast area, by volcanic
agency beneath, that is, by the accumulation of vapor and gases
beneath the earth's crust. The result would be, that the waters
of the northern ocean, with the vast masses of ice there accu-
mulated, would be driven in a southerly direction, at least over
the northern hemisphere. After the fractured crust had per-
mitted the pent up gases, vapors, and lava, to escape, it would
gradually subside, and thus bring back the diluvial waters to
their former beds in a quiet manner ; and thus, ere long, all
traces of the catastrophe would disappear, unless the aqueous
currents should have been powerful enough deeply to denude
the surface and transport diluvium and bowlders. Now we
know that volcanic power does frequently operate in this very
manner. Witness the new island of Sabrina, which, in 1811,
was rabed near the Azores, and gradually sunk back again after
a few days : also, in 1831, the island of Hotham, or Graham,
in the Mediterranean, which has also disappeared.

We are not anxious that our readers should believe thb to
have been the mode in which the Noachian deluge was pro-
duced. Our main object is to show that a natural cause exists
sufficient to have produced that castastrophe, and thus to take
away all improbability respecting the occurrence of such an
event fix>m its supposed physical impossibility. This is, how-
ever, the hypothesis respecting the cause of the Mosaic deluge,
that is now extensively adopted by able geologists. Some have
imputed it to the elevation of the Andes, others to that of the
Alps. It seems to us, however, that there is every probability
these mountuns were nused from the ocean at an earlier period
than that of the scriptural deluge ; and if the deluge of geology
be regarded as identk^, the waves produced by the lifting up
of those mountains would not have flowed in a direction corres-
ponding to the course which we have shown the waters of that

1888.] Hutarical and Qeological Dduges. S5

cataclysm to have taken. It b sufficient, however, to show,
that geologists in general are now willing to admit that this cause
is sufficient to deluge the globe. For, a few years since, it was
thought that science could demonstrate the physical impossi-
bility of such an event. We do not contend that this hypothe-
s'ls is free from difficulties, or that it is to be received as estab-
lished truth. But we maintain that it is in perfect conformity
with the present state of geological science.

Were we disposed to speculate still further, we might suggest,
that perhaps in this hypothesis, we find a cause for thepower-
fid rain of forty days that accompanied the deluge. For it is
well known, that the vast quantities of aqueous vapor that are
liberated when a volcano gets vent, sometimes produce long
continued drenching rains. If a powerful eruption took place
in northern regions, the vapor set free could be rapidly ccxi-
densed by the cold, and fall in the form of snow or rain, possi-
bly for a period as long as that described by Moses. But we
would not lay much stress on this suggestion.

We here close our protracted comparison of the historical
and geological deluges. We are aware that we have conducted
our readers, — if indeed they have not grown weary and aban-
doned us, — through a great deal of what they may consider
dry detail. But we have long been satisfied that the superficial
and popular view of this subject, which is usually presented,
does not bring the true state m the question before the mind,
while it tends to prejudice still moro against revealed truth, those
acute minds who see how shallow and defective is the argu-
ment. If any one will thoroughly understand the subject, he
must submit to the labor of getting acquainted with the details ;
and instead of having presented too many of these for this pur-
pose, we know that our reasoning will often appear obscure and
inconclusive, because we have not presented more. We shall
now close by presenting a summary of the conclusions at which
we have arrived.

We have endeavored to show, that the traditions found in all
ages and in all nations, civilized and savage, respecting deluges,
had probably a common origin, viz. the deluge of Noah ; though
the facts were often blended with the history of local deluges.

We have shown that most extraordinary revolutions of opin-
ion have taken place respecting the geological deluge ; and have
reduced the opinions of standard writers of the present day on
this subject to three classes : first, some deny that any traces of

Vol. XI. No. 29. 4

5W Historical and Geohgical Deluges. [ Jak.

a general deluge exist on the globe : secondly, others admit a
general deluge to have taken place, but place the epoch of its
occurrence anterior to the creation of man ; and thirdly, some
not only admit such a catastrophe to have taken place, but sup-
pose it possible it may have been identical with that of Noah.

We have attempted to prove, that those who believe there
are at present no traces in nature of Noah's deluge, are not
therebv brought into collision with the Bible.

In doing this, we have shown that the organic remains in the
secondary and tertiary rocks could not have been deposited
there by the Noachian deluge ; and that we are to look for the
traces of that event only on the surface of the globe. Also,
that the Mosaic account does not require us to presume that
any marks of that catastrophe would remain to the present time.
But yet, that the frequent occurrence of deluges in early tiroes,
as shown by geology, Aimishes a presumption in favor of that
described in Scripture.

We have shown, that there has been a powerful rush of wa-
ters over the northern hemisphere, especially America, from the
north and north-west, in comparatively modem times ; as is
proved by the direction m which bowlders and diluvium have
been transported, and by grooves and scratches on the surface
of rocks, as well as by denuded vallies of considerable depth.

We have inferred that this geological deluge corresponds with
that of Scripture, in having been extensive, if not universal, and
in having taken place in comparatively recent times : and that
therefore, it is possible the two deluges may have been identi-
cal ; though the evidence at present rather preponderates against
this opinion.

In considering the objections derived from geology and natu-
ral history against the Mosaic account of the deluge, we have
concluded that no natural processes have been pointed out on
the globe, whose commencement can be proved to have been
at an earlier date than that event ; though in some instances
they might have begun before the flood, and have been sinoe
recommenced. Also, that the present state of geological theo-
ries renders the submersion of the globe by the flux and reflux
of the waters c|uite possible and probable. Also, that we can
explun the existence of the olive in the region of Ararat at the
time of the deluge and its subsequent extinction, without resort-
ing to a miracle. Also, that the language of Scripture does not
necessarily mean that pairs of all animals on the globe, zoologi-

1888.] ERitarical md Geahgkal Deku^es. £7

cally considered, were preserved in the ark ; nor that the flood
was universal over the globe, but onlj in the regions where
man dwelt ; and hence that we are not required to suppose that
all animals now on the globe have spread from the regions of
Ararat. Also, that there may have been a new creation of
many species after the deluge ; so that the facts respecting the
present distribution of animals, does not conflict with the Mosa-
ic account.

Finally, in inquiring whether any natural causes could have
produced the deluge, we have shown that of the three hypoth-
eses maintained in modern times on this subject, the sudden ele-
vation of a mountain or continent by internal ibrce, is the only
one that can be defended with any plausibility ; since the ap-
proach of a comet to the earth could have produced no such
effect, and the idea that our present continents were raised from
the bottom of the ocean at that time, is contradicted both by
Scripture and geology.

If these conclusions be admitted, every reasonable man will
allow, that the Mosaic account of the deluge stands forth fairly
and fidly vindicated from all collision with the facts of science.
Nay, a presumption is hence derived in favor of the Mosaic ac-
count. We are aware that some will be disappointed if we do
not go further, and say that geology strikingly confirms the Mo-
saic history, as it has been customary to do m most of our pop-
ular treatises on the deluge. But we prefer to take our stand
on firm ground. And notwithstanding the multiplied evidences
of diluvial action which geology presents, the difficultv of iden-
tifying these cataclysms with the Noachian deluge, is so great
in the present state of our knowledge, that it is safer to consider
the point as unsettled. Nor is this of much importance, so far
as revelation is concerned. The truth and inspiration of the
Bible rest on a foundation of evidence, independent of physical
science, too deep and firm to need the auxiliary support of geol-
ogy, or natural history. If we can only show, that there is no
collision between the facts of revelation and those of science,
we have done all that is necessary or important. If any remain
skeptical after this is done, the cause of their infidelity does not
lie in any scientific difficulties, nor in the want of independent
evidence to the truth of the holy Scriptures. It is the fiuit of
a corrupt and unhumbled heart.

28 Study of the CXastict. [Jan*

ARTICLE II.

The Utility of the Study or the Classics to
Theological Students.

Bj J. Paektrd.

The utility of the study of the classics in a college course is
now hardly questioned. Their claims have been advocated with
so much ability, the decision in their favor has been so unani-
mous, that we may hope the question is put at rest, and not
likely to be soon agitated even in an age so fond of innovation
as the present.

But we fear their importance to the theological student is not
fully recognized, ebe we should not with pain witness so uni-
versal, and so systematic a renunciation of their study on leaving
college.

All history shows that where profane learning has languished,
sacred learning has sympathized with it. The one has always
been the handmaid to the other, and they have ever gone hand
in hand. They sank together in the dark ages ; together they
rose like the twin lucida sidera of the heavens, when " the
sacred Bible was sought out of the dusty comers where profane
falsehood and neglect had thrown it, the schools opened, and
divine and human learning raked out of the embers of forgotten
tongues."* Religion has ever been a friend to profane learning,
and never do her misguided friends do her more bjury than
when they denounce their union. "It was the christian
churchy^ Bacon well says, " which amidst the inundations of
the Scythians on the one side from the north-west, and the Sar-
acen from the east, did preserve m the sacred lap and bosom
thereof, the precious relics of heathen learnings which other-
wise had been extinguished, as if they had never been.^f We
hold to the positions, that there cannot be too much human
learning if it is but sanctified ; that religion lends to learning her
highest finish, and most excellent grace ; and, that every thing
may be rendered subservient to the illustration of divine truth.
Profane learning may embellish sacred. To use the quaint

• Milton. ~" '

f Advancement of Learning, p. 52. London Edit

1838.] Shtdy of the Claiiici. 99

DlustratioDS of the fathers : The Egyptians may be spo3ed of
their gold and silver and fine garments in which they trusted,
the sword may be wrested from Goliath's hand to cut off his
own head,* and Hiram with his Tyrians and uncircumcised ar-
tificers may be employed to build a temple to Jehovah's glory.
The most insidious blow ever aimed at Christianity was the
edict of the emperor Julian, forbidding the classical authors to
be taught and explained in christian schools. This malignant
enemy of Christianity was sagacious enough to see that if the
study of the classics was neglected, the true method of inter-

Jreting the Bible would soon be lost ; legitimate principles of
ermeneutics would soon be forgotten, and Christians would
resort to scholastic subtleties, find no end or bottom in specula-
tion after departing from the simplicity of the text, and at length
sink down into absurd superstitions.f The fathers took the
alarm at once, and used all their effi)rts to counteract so malig-
nant a design. Several of them composed Greek and Latin
manuals, and even wrote poems and works on sacred subjects
which would compensate m the best manner possible, for the
loss of the classics. Augustine % expressly classes this decree
among the persecutions of the Christians by Julian.

Augustine advises that we should spoil the heathen authors of
their precious illustrations, and embellishments, and make them
subservient to the preaching of the gospel.^ He speaks figu-
ratively of Cyprian as having robbed the Egyptians oi their gold
and silver and fine linen. Augustine, though unacquainted with
Hebrew and Greek, always strenuously recommended their stu-
dy. || Gregory Nazianzen thus speaks : '^ Learning holds the

* '^ iDtorqaere de manibus hostium gladium et Goliae superbiMi-
mi caput proprio roucrone truncare." — Jerome.

t ^ Aa soon as the study of languages languiabed after the days of
the apostles, the gospel faith, and the whole of religion declined, and
maoy grievous errors and blind superstitions arose from ignorance of
the languages. On the other hand, when the languages revived, the
gospel shed abroad a glorious light, and accomplished so much, that
the whole world looked on in surprise, and was forced to confesSf
that we had the gospel almost as pure and unadulterated as the apos-
tles."—Epist. 0pp. T. XIX. 399. Lips.

t De Civlt. Dei, Lib. XVIIL c. 52.

§ De Doctr. Christiana, Lib. IL 60.

I Neque enim ex Hebraea lingua, quam ignoro. Origan's acquain-
tance with Hebrew is very suspicious. Jerome of all the &thera

80 Study of the CUu$ic$. [Jan.

first place among human blessings. I do not only speak of
christian learning but of profane, which common uhristians,
from a mbguided judgment, hold in contempt as insidious, dan-
gerous and withdrawing the afiections from God.""* So thought
the reformers, especially Loither. His testimony is very em-
phatic. He says : " If by our fault we lose the learned langua*
ges by neglect, we shall lose the gospel.f Divine wisdom has
revived classical learning for the sake of restoring the gpspel,
which soon after arose from its ashes, and in this way over-
threw the tyranny of papacy. For the same reason Greece is
subjected to the Turks, that the exiled Greeks, dispersed through
all nations, should carry with them the Greek language, and thus
give others an opportunity of learning it. From this we infer,
that we shall never preserve the gospel unless by the aid of the
languages."! It would be difficult to make a selection fix)m
the passages m Luther's works, all having the same sentiment.
Similar were the sentiments of Melancthon and the earlier Ger-
man theologians, though some of them have been falsely accus-
ed of decrymg human learning. Melancthon remarks : '^ An
unlearned theology is altogether an Iliad of evils. For it is
an ill-digested system, in which points of great moment are not
fiilly explained, those are confounded which should be kept dis-
tinct, and again those are put asunder, which nature requires to
be united. Such a system cannot but produce infinite eirorsi
and endless divisions, because in such a want of arrangement, one
understands one thing, and another another, and while each one
defends his own fancy, divisions and contentions arise."^ How

seems to have understood it the best — See Gesen. Gesehichte der
Hebraischen Spracfae, p. 91.

• Orat. XXX. Tom. 11. p. ^6.

t ** Si culpa nostra commiserimus, at linguas eruditas neglectas
amktamus, Evangelium amittemus.'*

\ ** Nos evangelium nunquam retenturos esse, nisi fiat linguarum
auxilio."

§ ^ Omnino Ilias malorum est inerudita Theologia. Est enim con-
iusanea doctrina in qua magnae res non ezplicantur diserte, miscen-
tur ea, quae oportebat sejungi, rursus ilia, quae naturaconjungi postu-
lat distrahuntur. Talis doctrina non potest non gignere infinitos
errores^ infinitam dissipationem, quia in tanta confusione alius aliud
inteUigit et dum suum quisque soronium defendit, ezistant oertamina
el disMusionfls."— Tom. L p. 3S9.

t83&] Study of the Oairia. 31

faithfiil a picture of many systems of thedogy, not guarded and
secured by scientific arrangement and therefore not proof agmnst
fatal attacks ! Spener, one of the revivers of evangelical reli-
gion in Germany, observes : " I know not any one of all human
studies, in all departments of learning, which may not in its pro-
per place become of real use to a student, if it is pursued with-
out neglecting what is essential and if rightly applied.^' Again,
Spener says : ^^ I wish all students were not only more pious,
but more homed ; and on that account of those who are pious,
the more learned is always the more acceptable. A christian
student prays as earnestly for divine illumination, as if he re-
quired no diligence of his own ; but he studies also with the
same diligence as if his labors were to efiect every thing. For
it were a presumption and tempting of God only to pray and
then to await the divine illummation without one's own exer^
tions.'' Calvin weU remarks : " Scientia tamen nihil propterea
^od inflat magis vituperanda est quam gladius si in manus fu-
nosi incidat." — Learning is no more to be blamed for puffing
up, than a sword, which fidls bto the hands of a madman.

But not to multiply witnesses — all the reformers felt that
even profiine learning was from God, and to be applied to his
glory. The study of the classics familiarizes us with the spirit
of antiquity, and thus assists us in the interpretation of the sacred
Scriptures. Whatever calls off our minds from the present, and
carries us back to the past, contributes to our right understand-
ing of the spirit of the ancient world. As it is, we are so far
separated fiom it, that we ferget that the ancients were men of
like passions with us, having the same joys and griefs. We
need to live intellectually in the ancient wodd if we would im-
bibe its spirit. We must temporarily adopt their notions, their
modes of thinking, feeling and expression. Their ways of life,
their household, every day habits must become familiar to us.
We must put ourselves in their situation and not look at them
through the spectacles of our own peculiarities. This indeed
requires a peculiar promptness and flexibility of mental habits,
but it is also in a very considerable degree the result of long con-
tinued study. The difficulty of transferring ourselves to the
past is inc^reased m proportion the further we go back. Thus it
is more difficult to drink in the spirit of the Pentateuch, com-
posed in the veiy mfancy and morning freshness of the world,
than that of Homer. The study of the latter, however, throws
great light upon the former. Homer undoubtedly lived in Asia

33 iShidy of the OatricB. [Jan.

Mmor and under a simSar climate with Palestine. Tbb piox*
imity of country would naturaUy lead to similarity of language,
and above all to ^alogy in thought and expression. There b
a sameness in human nature every where under the same degree
of culture. Greater benefit may therefore be derived from a
study of the Greek, than of the Latin classics. They are the
more ancient, and their climate was more similar.

Homer was in fact the secular Bible of mankind for many
ages. It has been well said by one highly competent to judge :
'' The Old Testament and the Iliad reflect light mutually, each
on the other, and both in respect of poetry and morals, it may
with great truth be said that he who has the longest studied,
and the most deeply imbibed the spirit of the Hebrew Bible
will the best undferstand, and the most lastingly appreciate the
tale of Troy divine."* We are continually struck in reading
Homer with ihe similarity of manners and spirit, and parallel-
i3ms of language that constantly occur.

To hold communion with the past, we must live not only
inteUectually, but as it were physically in a foreign clime.
To understand the Scriptures we must live under the burning
sun of Palestine. Another heavens must be over our head ;
another earth beneath our feet. We must live amidst its win*
ter torrents, and its summer brooks-^ its deep ravines and its
extensive caves -^ we must look upon its barren fig trees, its
olives, its cedars — the glory of iJebanon, the excellency of
Canxiel and Sharon. In a word we must be familiar with the
objects, which suggested the pictures and imagery of Scripture,
if we would think over the same thoughts with its writers and
feel again their feelings.

The study of the classics materially assists in the interpreta-
tion of the Scriptures. As the same principles of interpretation
are applicable to both, he will be, caeteris paribus, the best in-
terpreter who has been accustomed to interpret the classics.
The habits he has formed are just the habits which are needed
for an interpreter of Scripture. Origen among the fathers strongly
recommended the classics as an excellent preparatory disci-
pline to the study of the Scriptures ; for errors b their interpre-
tatiop, which the tyro at first would natui'ally make, would be
less dangerous. The greatest masters of interpretation have at

* H. N. Coleridge's Introduction to the Greek Clasaic Poeti, p. 74, —
a book worthy of all praise.

1838.] Study of the Oaaics. 33

all times ooncurred in this opinion of the importance of the
study of the classics — and one's habits of interpretation strengthen
the judgment, ^ve it acumen and a discrimination of things
that diflfer. Perhaps no faculty is more susceptible of cultiva-
tion. Hence the great advantage of the study of the classics
in eaily life. The habit of weighing and balancing evidence
for or against a particular interpretation gives acuteness to the
judgment even in moral decisions.

And here we might remark that the Greek classics are par-
ticularly mterestmg as written in the language of the New Tes-
tament. We are aware there is a difference m the idiom, the
moold in which they are cast, and even in the signification of
individual words, out still no one will deny that we could not
dispense with classical Greek in the interpretation of the New
Testament. Luther's prediction, we doubt not, is substantially
true that if Greek is lost, we shall lose the Gospel. Transla-
tions would soon become obsolete, the streams would become
more and more impure the further from the fountain head, and
that too without remedy, or with any means of purifying diem.
Like the schoolmen, theologians would resort to fanciful, alle-
graical expositions, to subtleties, to endless quibbles, and gross
darkness would brood over the world.

The study of the classics has a well nigh marvellous effect in
refining the taste, and quickenmg the sense of the beautiful.
Now as so much of the Bible is poetry, how important that we
should be conversant with the best ancient poets ! Though
the language ts different, yet it admits of illustration and com-
parison from the classic poets. We have but to turn to Lowth,
Knapp and Grrotius to see how much may be borrowed from
the classics to illustrate the Scriptures. The poetry of all na-
tions has many points in common ; though it may difier in
imagery and costume. In all alike, it is the language of excited
feeling, and differs in the language of ordinary life not only m
diction, but in the predominance of the imagination and fimcy.
If this is so, the poetry of one nation may be illustrated fitxn the
universal poetic language of others. Much of the Bible is in
poetry for the sake of making a deeper impression than a dry
didactic manner. He, who knew all the avenues to the human
heart, for be. made it, has presented truth in such a way as to
interest his intelligent creatures.

He who is absolute master of this poetic language, wields a
powerful instrument of persuasion. We have barely alluded to

Vol. XI. No. 29. 5

34 Study of the Classics. [Jan.

the effects of the study of the classics upon the style. Para-
doxical as it may first appear, they bring us back to the sim-
plicity of nature, give us a distaste for false ornaments, the dtdcia
vitia, which so often mislead the tyro and render our language
better adapted to the comprehension of the uneducated. Their
noblest works are continually warning us to be simple. Cicero
says, ^^ In dicendo vitium vel maximum esse a mugari genere
orationisy atque a cansuetudine communis sensus abhorre.'' If
we follow such guides we cannot easily go wrong, or fall into
dangerous errors of style.*

We are sorry the classics have lost their ancient appellation
of the humanities y such is their effect in humanizing man, that
they preeminently deserve this title. The orations found in
the Greek classics form the best model for the preacher. With
one consent both antiquity and modem times have pronounced
them the models which approach nearest perfection. They
have gained the universal suffrage of all times and ages. They
have reached the summit of well-nigh unattainable perfection,
and are now gazed at afar off. We hesitate not to say, that if
the orations of Demosthenes were critically, and aesthetiadly
studied, they would go very far in giving the student a taste for
real simplicity, they would cure him of the vulgar appetite for
tropes and metaphors and flowers ; of seeking ornaments for
their own sake ; of going out of his way for flowers, instead of
plucking them if found in bis path. We speak that we do
know, and testify that we have tried, that the faithful, ofl-
re viewed study of one of Demosthenes's orations — that De Co-
rona for instance — would do more to give the student right appre-
hensions of true eloquence, than the study of all the worl^ in
rhetoric in our language. The student who has never read
bis orations will be astonished, as Rheinhard was, at his natural-
ness, his simplicity and want of afl^tation and ornament. He
was the model Rheinhard followed, and we would hold him up
to the theological student as a safe one. Could his style of
argument and warmth be copied, its success would be infallible
over a modem audience. The style of no orator of antiquity
could be so safely copied in the pulpit. We almost wish,

• ^ Tanqaam scopulum sic vitea iosolena verbum," said Caesar. —
We need not refer to the numerous rules of the same nature to be
ibund in that moat invaluable compend of rhetoric, Horace's Are
Poetica.

1838.] Study of the Clasiics. 35

though it may shock some of our readers, that the stereotype
models of pulpit eloquence, particularly of the French school,
might be fairly put an end to. The world would be no loser ;
bombast would be exchanged for simplicity, and art for nature.
Let but the preacher be as deeply imbued with his subject,
with nothing but his subject, as Demosthenes was ; let him
drop himself, as Paul did ; let him seek only to be understood
and felt ; let him use that vehement reasoning, that ^< logic set
on fire,^' which Demosthenes used, and with the Holy Ghost
sent down finom heaven, he would do wonders in converting sin-
ners from the power of Satan unto God. Perhaps the student
even after a repeated perusal will not be fully prepared to sym-
pathize with the glowing feelings of Wyttenbach,* who found
nothing of eloquence in Demosthenes the first three readings.
'' At the* fourth, an unusual and super-human emotion pervaded
my mind. I could now see the orator at one time all ardor ;
at another in anguish, at another borne away by an impulse
which nothing could resist. As I proceed, the same ardor
is kindled in my own mind, and I am carried away by the
same impulse. I fancy that I am Demosthenes himself, stand-
ing before the assembly, deiiverbg this oration and exhorting
the Athenians to emulate the bravery and glory of their ances-
tors* I can no longer read the oration silently, but aloud. "f
Though the student may not be able to go all lengths with
Wyttenbach, yet he will feel and admire the manner in which
Demosthenes guns his purpose ; now by concentrated argument,
hurled like a Uiunderbolt ; now by withering irony and sarcasm,

* See Stuart's Diseertatioos on the Smdy of the Original Lan-
guages of the Bible, p. 58.

f Why is oot the De Coronft of Demoethenes studied more in our
Colleges ? This one oration thoroughly mastered would do more for
the mere acquisition of the Greek language, than a collectioD of scraps
and beauties, from all the most eminent Greek orators. It is very impor-
tant that a student should feel he has mastered some one author ; be^*
sides, by hurrying from Lysias to Isocrates^ and from Isocrates to
Demosthenes, he loses all that might facilitate his progress in any one
author from ftmiliarity with his style. The use of Collectanea has a
tendency to give miscellaneous, unsystematic and ill-digested know-
ledge. The student collects a few vague ideas, some moral precepts,
some jokes, and some accounts of battles, instead of habits of patient
thought or an acquaintance with the general style of any one author.

36 Study of the Ckuncs. [J Air.

and thus attains the highest intellectual eminency the world has
ever seen, that of

" Wielding at will that fierce democratie,
Shaking the areenal, and fulmining over Greece,
To Macedon and Artaxerxes' throne."^

We would, were it practicable, that the classics could be studied
to some limited extent in our theological seminaries as is the
custom in Germany. But we fear it is out of the question.
Short as is the term of our theological study, the youdi of out
land are disposed practicaUy to make it shorter. Under the spe-
cious plea, that the harvest is great, and the Lord hath need of
them, they take a short cut in theology, and run before they
are sent. They find when too late that they have deceived
themselves and robbed their minds of that knowledge and ex-
perience, by which they might have been thoroughly famished
unto every good word and work. If the student in private
would keep up his classical studies, the same object would be
gained.

And we would here remark, that the neglect of classical
studies is to be attributed in some measure to the manner in
which they are taught m the academy and college. The stu-
dent, perhaps, never was interested in them ; he never thought
of them otherwise than a hard lesson to be conned over, recited,
and as soon as possible forgotten. He knew that Xenophon
was easy Crreek, and Thucydides hard Greek ; but he never felt
the inspiration, the freshness, the force, the truth to nature of
the classics. He never looked to the living soul which ani-
mates them. He never entered into their magic circle, was
never initiated into these mysteries which are eminently g^ott^ij-
€PTa fWPiTOiaiy^ which only have a voice and significancy for
the initiated.

** They have no ear, nor soul to apprehend
The sublime notion and high mystery.'' f

One of the most common pleas for the neglect of the classics
is the want of leisure amidst the arduous duties of the ministry.
But we fear indolence is generally at the root of the matter,
the want of a true scholar-like feeling and spirit. The time

* Milton's Paradise Regained, Book 1 V.
f Milton's Coinus.

1838.] Study of the Classics. 37

required is not great ; the benefit in improving the style and
tone of thinking, real and lasting. One hour a day redeemed
fixHn relaxation, from company, or in any other way consistently
with duty, would accomplish large results. It would keep alive
dasncal studies, would enable the student to advance a step,
and would add something to his intellectual opulence. We
would ask the student to be honest with himself, and inquire
whether an hour, not assigned to other duties, could be spent
more profitably. That it is possible to find time even in the
most fiuthful and laborious ministerial life, we learn in the case
of Robert Hall. '^ He thought himself defective," his bbgra-
pher remarks, " in a tasteful and critical acquaintance with the
Ureek poets. He read the Iliad and Odyssev twice over ; pro-
ceeding with nearly equal care, through nearly all the trag^ies
of Sophocles and Euripides, and thence extended his classical
reading in all directions. To the LAtin and Greek poets, onr
tors, and historians, he devoted a part of every day for three
years. He studied them as a scholar, but he also studied them
as a moralist and philosopher, so that while he appreciated their
peculiarities and beauties with his wonted taste, and carefully
unproved his style of writing and bis tone of thinking by the
study of the best models, he sujfered them not to depreciate his
esteem for the moderns." *

Another excuse, not now so frequently advanced as ibrmeriy,
but perhaps not the less secretly entertamed, is found by the
student in the danger to spirituality of mind from the study of
the classics. That this is not necessarily the case might be
shown from the examples of Calvin, Melanothon, and the
frthers of the English church — men, who were the great lights
of the age in which they lived, and whose works posterity will
not willingly let die. Though they were men of various erudi-
tion, though they had rifled tiie treasures of the old and mighty
world, grappled with whole libraries and ranged the whole cir-
cle of human knowledge, yet they bowed as low at the foot of
the cross, and their piety was as simple, humble and childlike,
as though they had just known, and known no more, than that
the Bible was from God.

But we need not enter the lists as apologists for profane

* Gregory'b Life, p. 54. Aid. Edit — Pareau well remarks, ** Per
QDiTerBum borum studiorum corBum, ne tunc quidemeas literas omit-
tai negligatque, quaodo grayissima officia doctoris ebristiani habebiu

38 Study of the Clonics. [Jan.

learning. We are not set for its defence as was Bacon, who in
his Advancement of Learning refutes in detail, the various
objections against it. We are fallen on diflkrent times and dif-
ferent circumstances.

We fear that in most cases indolence will here be found to
be at the bottom of such an excuse. Vitringa, whose spirit-
uality was never questioned by those who knew him, thus
spoke : ^' Tandem nemo cum ratione existimet diffusius hoc
studii literarii genus inimicum esse pietati, mentemque distror
here ab arctiore cammercio cum Deo in Oiristo per exercita-
tionem vero fidei et meditationis. Sane qui hoc sibi persua-
deant, segnitiei suae obtendant." In the same Prefiice to hb
Observations, a most erudite and valuable work, he laments
that whileHbe field of theology is so extensive, theological stu-
dents confine themselves within such narrow bounds, stick at
first principles, and ilo not go on unto perfection in knowledge :
per integram vitam in ipsb haereant principiis.*

We are fully persuaded that leammg may enlarge our views
of truth without weakening our faith, that we may be learned
ourselves without havmg a learned religion.

It is a sad proof of our depravity, that the complacency in
the exercise of our powers is unfavorable to that feeling of
humility and that sense of our deep wants which draws us to
the Redeemer.

But yet such a union of deep piety and profound learning is
not only practicable, but has actually been witnessed in the in-
stances before alluded to. The spirit of the age as alien to
such pursuits may be offered as an excuse by some. It is indeed
a most restless, stirring age, as busy after the xl naivoregov as
ever were the Greeks of Demosthenes's or Paul's time, an age
of innovation and demolition. But for this very reason should

• Buddaeus, one of the most learned men of his age, remariia : *^ It
is of no use to conceal our diseases. When I look around, I am
overwhelmed with grief, nay, am astooisbed, when I consider how
few students come up to tbe expectations and wishes of the church.
One reason is, that they spend so short a time at school, as scarcely
to lay the foundation or learn the elements of theology, (quod commo'
ranlwr hnvi admodum tempore in aeademiUs ; quod quidem addiseendis
neeessaniSf aut fundcunentia fiU ponendis visi siiifficit,) So far from
aspiring to high attainments, they scarcely catch a gliropse of the
wide field, and ever after stick at first principles." Praef, ad Jsagogen
' ad Tketdoguan Vrdoersam*

1838.] lAterary hipottures. 39

the student make a stand, and resbt such a spirit. Who is to
do it if he does not, whose very business and profession is to
regulate others, to be the light of the world, the salt of the
earth in an intellectual, as well as in a moral and religious res*
pect ? He would be treacherous to his cause were he to be
carried with the multitude to do evil. Rather should he be a
rallying point, rather should his voice be heard

'^In worst extremes and on tbe perilous edge of battle."*

But we would have all this knowledge sanctified. If there was
the only alternative of doing the one, and leaving the other
undone, we would say with Leighton, '' one devout thought is
worth all human learning." Though we set great store by
learning, yet we set for higher by devout piety ; we would have
all the light possible from whatever source, concentrated upon
the sacred page, till it glows and bums, tiU a more excellent
glory gilds it. Then shall we find our studies profitable and
availmg when all our ends are single — for truth — for Christ.

ARTICLE III.

LiTEBABT ImPOSTUBES.

>

By David Foidiek, jr. Bottoo.

With no great effort at amplification this theme might be
made to occupy a considerable series of historical volumes. Our
readers may judge, therefore, how uncomfortable is the sense
of compression which we experience in undertaking to consider
it withm the limits of a few pages.

In the first place, what are we to understand by the expres-
sion literary imposture 1 Would it be an erroneous use oi lan-
guage to denominate aU bad writers impostors ? Are we bound
to employ milder terms than fraud, imposition^ in speaking of
productions which under false pretences rob men of their time
and their money ; which, not only serve no useful purpose, but
efllect vast injury, ccmvey grossly distorted conceptions of tbe

* Milton's Paradiae Lost, Book I.

40 lAterary hipoiturei. [Jan.

subjects which they treat, and falsify both facts and principles ?
He who presents himself before mankind in print impliedly
promises that it shall be worth a reader's while to give him au-
dience. If performance does not equal promise, there is clearly
a breach 6l faith, and readers are defrauded. The plea o(
praiseworthy intent will perhaps be urged in bar. In very
many cases, however, this pretension cannot be set up with
any shadow of reason, the accused having written only to make
a book for the sake of acquiring money, celebrity, or other like
advantage to himself, without thinking of benefit to accrue to
his readers ; and in most cases when the plea can be honestly
urged against a harsh sentence for fidlure in performance, its
validity is Questionable, since the intention to benefit mankind
cannot at all exculpate a bad author, if it be his own fiiult that
he is ignorant of his incapacity. How few bad writers would
pass ^e ordeal of these observaticHis unscathed ; and what a
large proportion of the books with which the world has heea
deluged must, b consequence, be denominated literary ifopoi^
tures ! How many writers of professedly erudite '' folios, quartos,
8vo6., twelves," have been almost utterly devoid of acquaintance
with the subjects which they treated, perhaps extending their
works in exact, but alas ! inverse, proportion to their know-
ledge ! How many histories are there which well deserve to
be ranked ^th the production of one Peter Comestor, whkh
is termed bv Disraeli '^ a history of all things and a bad history
of every thmg !" How many poets have ^^ poured along the
town a flood of rhyme," which attracted notice, if at all, only
on account of the extent or source of the inundation ! How
many writers of every class say a great deal and mean nothing !
How many think they mean something, perhaps really do, but
express themselves so obscurely as to sifect only the eye or ear,
without insinuadng a particle of sense into the understanding !
There are men in our day who appear to be of the same mind
as Lycophron, a Greek poet, who protested that he would hang
himself if he found a pers<xi that could understand his ^' Cas-
sandra." Were such men by chance to write somewhat which
€ould be comprehended, and, upon discovering the slip which
they had made, to hang themselves inconUnently, the world, I
opine, could hardly be considered a loser. QuinctUian says that
the obscurity of a writer is generally in proportion to his inca-
pacity. The ancients seem to have outdone the modems (and
certainly this is saying much,) m regard to obscurity of style.

1638.] LUeriny bipasturei. 41

It was inculeated by a teacher of rhetoric in Quioctilian's time
as an ornament ; and he compelled his pupils to correct such
passages of Uieir writings as were too intelligible.
The words of Byron :

^Tis pleasant, sure, to see one's name in print ;
A book's a book, although there's nothing in't,"

are very true, and we might be content that the many who
have been moved to their literary efibsions solely or chiefly by
the prospect of this gratification, should enjoy it without censure,
were it not that it is procured at an immensely disproportionate
expense on the part of the public, -^ an expense which no prin-
ciple of benevolence requires that it shoyld encounter.

As will be presumed, however, it is not our intention to take
the term literary imposture in this large sense. The attempt
to collect and recount even the names alone of those who,
through the ambition of appearing in the character of author,
have perpetrated grievous impositions upon the good sense and
patience of mankind, would be vain.

Taking a more narrow, and therefore more suitable, view at
our subject, we may conveniently, perhaps with exact precision,
divide literary impostors into the following classes. 1. Such
as appropriate to themselves the productions or the thoughts of
others with the intent that they shall pass as their own.
II. Such as attempt to give a false aspect to their own figments
by incorrect ascription of their authorship. III. Such as pub-
lish intentional untruth.

The first class consists of writers commonly denominated,
firom the Latb, plagiarists.

It is not the case, however, that all borrowing is plagiarism,
in any odious sense. A writer may derive hints from the pro-
ductions of other men, without laying himself open to the
slightest censure. Thus Milton, it is said, drew the suggestion
of his Paradise Losf from an Italian drama or mystery ; and
Danie that of his Inferno from the '' Vision" of Alberico. If
the statement be true, it does not at all detract from the merit
of either writer ; for the merit of neither depends at all upon
that which they are supposed to have borrowed. Nor can any
man, with propriety, venture to term it a disingenuous course
to adopt an idea, even without acknowledgement, when the
accompaniments and the costume, the things of main impor-
tance, and which, indeed, gave the idea all its value, ware

Vol- XI. No. 29. 6

48 Literary b^pastures. [Jiif.

original. Every one can see that such an adoption Is very dif-
ferent from the silent, literal transfer of lines, sentences, or para-
graphs out of another's production into one's own, or the silent
appropriation of another's thoughts with a fraudulent attempt at
concealment by alterations in the fonn of expression, by the
destruction of the writing which is pillaged, or by any other like
means. No writer can be said to act honorably, who borrows,
in full consciousness that he is doing so, any important thought
or expression without acknowledgement. Still, there have been
men of considerable reputation, who could unblushingly advo-
cate this species of robbery, and even inculcate the art of edit-
ing it without incurring the hazard of detection. A French
professor, named Richesource, published two books exhibiting
the prbciples of authorship which he assiduously taught his
pupils in his private lectures. The first of these books was
entitled : " The Mask of Orators, or the manner of disguising
with ease all kinds of composition." His definition of plagia-
rism, as stated by D'Israeli, is as follows : '^ It is the art, or
an ingenious and easy mode, which some adroitly employ to
change or disguise all sorts of speeches of their own composition
or of that of other authors, for their pleasure or their utility, in
such a manner that it becomes impossible even for the author
himself to recognize his own work, his own genius, and his own
style, so skilfully shall the whole be disguised." The art he
makes to consist in arranging the parts of a sentence in a diffe-
rent Older, exchangmg one word or phrase for another which is
equivalent, etc. Thus for probity a plagiarist would substitute
religion or virtue ; for capacity, ability or eruditioTiy etc. His
second work was denominated " The Art of Writing and Speak-
ing ; or a method of composing all sorts of letters, and holding
a polite conversation." At the close of the preface to this book
he informs his readers, that authors who may be in want of
essays, sermons, pleadings, letters or verses may be accommo-
dated on ap[^cation to him. It seems he was resolved not to
belie his name. A Richesource (rich source) he must have
been indeed to indolent or incapable persons who desired to
enjoy the reputation of authorship.

It has been too general a practice among clergymen in all
christian countries, least of all probably in ours, to appropriate
to their own use, in preaching, the printed or MS. sermons of
their more gifted or at least more prolific brethren. In England
and France, perhaps in other countries, it is common for ser-

1888.] Literary hnpostures. 43

mcMis to be printed in a type resembling manuscript, for the
purpose of general circulation among clergymen.

Roilin, in his work on the Belles-Lettres, if we remember
right, speaks of the practice prevalent in his time, of culling
materials for sermons from the productions of the fathers, not
only without censure, but with positive tokens of approbation.

It is beyond doubt that many works of the ancients have been
lost to the worid firora the anxiety of those who had pilfered
out of them that thehr thefts might be concealed. In the mid*
die ages, when copies of ancient works were extremely rare,
the temptation was great, to one who came by accident into
possession of a MS. which was most probably the only one in
existence, to despoil it of its contents, ctroulate them in his own
name, and destroy the evidence of his plagiarism. Many of
the Withers, it is pretty certain, now stalk majestically in bor-
rowed robes ; and many will probably retain their ill-gotten
dignity down to the latest generations. Augustine is said to
have been deeply indebted to Varro, a learned Roman writer,
for the contents of his great work " The City of God ;" and to
this circumstance we owe the loss of almost ^11 Varro's nume-
rous and very valuable writings, they having been burned by
Pope Gregory VII. to screen Augustine fh)m the charge of
plagiarism.

In later times Leonard Aretino, a scholar of eminence, hav-
ing found a Greek MS. of Procopius on the Gothic war, trans-
lated it into Latin and published it as his own production. It
passed as such until the accidental discovery of another MS. of
the same work revealed his fraud.

We know that Cicero wrote a work in two books on Ohry ;
for he refers to it himself in his treatise De Officiis.* Petrarch
was in possession of it. He sent it to his preceptor, who, under
the pressure of extreme poverty, pawned it, and died soon after
without disclosing where it was. It was never recovered.
Years afterward, this treatise of Cicero was noticed in a cata-
logue of books bequeathed to a monastery. Search was made
for it, but it could not be found. Peter Alcyonius, who was
physician to the monastery, published a book De Exilioy which
contained many splendid passages not at all of a piece with the
rest of the production. It was therefore reasonably surmised
that he had purioined the MS., applied to his own purpose such

• L. II. c. 9.

44 lAtermry inposiurei. [Jar.

pam of it as were susceptible of such, application, and then de-
stroyed it.

In 1649 Barbosa, bishop of Ugento, obtained by accident
an ancient work which he published in his own name under the
title, De Officio Episcopi. The accident referred to was this.
His attention was attracted to a leaf of MS. around a fish which
was brought into his house by one of his servants. Being in-
terested by the perusal of it, he searched for and procured the
volume of which it formed a part, and published it as we have
stated.

We will mention a few instances of bold plagiarism in later
days. Richard Cumberland published some excellent versions
of fragments of the Greek dramatists, and long enjoyed the repu-
tation of Greek scholarship, while, in truth, the learning he ex-
hibited was almost all derived from MS. notes of his grand-
father, the celebrated Dr. Bentley, respecting which notes he at
first maintained entire silence. Ultimately, however, he acknow-
ledged his obligation, being driven by a direct charge to the
alternative of acknowledgement or the dangerous as wellj'as
criminal commission of falsehood.

Dr. Middleton was very much indebted to a Scotch writer
named Bellenden in many parts of his famous Life of Cicero.
As he was cautiously silent in regard to his Scotch benefactor,
and the work of the latter, " De tribus luminibus," was exceed-
ingly rare, the plagiarism was not exposed to the public gene-
rally for a considerable time. It was, however, early whispered
about among the learned, and at length Dr. Parr republished
Bellenden's book, prefixing a preface partly occupied with re-
marks on Middleton's unfair procedure. When Parr's expo-
sure appeared, it occurred to the recollection of a gentleman
who had been acquainted with Dr. Middleton, that, just before
the publication of the Life of Cicero, he happened to ask Mid-
dleton if he had seen Bellendenus, and that at the inquiry he
faltered, grew pale, and acknowledged he had. Undoubtedly
the rarity of Bellenden's work gave Middleton hopes of escaping
detection. It is said that there were not then more than ten
copies to be found in all the libraries of England. It was pub-
lished on the C43ntinent, we believe at Paris, where Bellenden
resided ; and the whole impression, with the exception of a
few copies, was lost in a storm on the English coast, which
drove the vessel containing it to the bottom. Such was its
rarity, ihat it is not mentioned by some of the most noted bib-

1838.] Utefary hfipoiturei. 45

liognipbical writers^ Morhof, Scfaelhorn, etc. Middleton is
charged by Dr. Parr and others, probably on just grounds, with
the perpetration of numerous plagiarisms in other productions
of his pen.

The secret history of the authorship of literary productions
would strip many a name of the reputation it enjoys, and place
laurels on the brow of many a man who

*^ In life's low vale remote bos pined alone,

Then dropped into the grave, unpitied and unknowo !"

Rank and wealth have obtained unmerited eminence in the lite-
rary world, at the expense of the time and abilities of gifted
dependents. The famous book called Eikon BasiKkiy which
passed as the production of Charles I., is now known not to
have been written by that king. It is supposed, though per-
haps not satisfactorily proved, to have been written by one
Gauden. Cardinal Richelieu, the French minister, employed
a poet of the name of Chapelain to compose productions for
him, which he circulated as his own, and which served to pro-
cure him some little reputation as a &ie writer. Of this reputa-
tion he is said to have been more jealous and more proud than of
his statesmanship. Henry VIII. is supposed not to have been
the author of the Latin work against Luther which passed
under his name and procured him from Pope Leo X. the title
of Defender of the Faith. Instances of this nature might be
multiplied to a very great extent.

Besides the influence exerted by station and riches over
obscurity and poverty, othiBr circumstances have often led to
incorrect ascriptions of the authorship of books. The work
which passes under the name of HogartVs Analysis of Beauty
was written for Hogarth by Dr. Morrell, as some say, or accord-
ing to others by Dr. Hoadly. Of the noted Bampton Lectures,
those delivered in 1784 by Dr. White, and published as his in
one of the volumes of the series, were almost wholly the work
of Dr. Parr and a t^lergyman named Badcock. Dr. White
made use of the good offices of both his friends, without inform-
ing either of the assistance given him by the other. Accident
led Dr. Parr to the discovery of this course of double-dealing,
and he immediately published a merciless disclosure of the facts.
Raleigh's Historv of the World (so called) was in great part
the production ol a Dr. Robert Burrel, who was confined with
Sir Walter m the Tower during its composition. To him

46 Literary bipoitures. [Jan*

RsJeigh owed most of the recondite learning displayed in his
History. There were likewise other contributors ; among them
Ben Jonson.

The following curious account respecting a literary debtor to
others is given by D'Israeli. ^* Sir John I£ll owned to a friend
once when he fell sick, that he had over-fatigued himself with
writing seven works at once, one of which was on architecture
and another on cookery ! This hero once contracted to trans-
late Swammerdam's work on insects for fifty guineas. After
the agreement with the bookseller he perfectly recollected that
he did not understand a single word of the Dutch language ;
nor did there exist a French translation. The work, however,
was not the less done for this small obstacle. Sir John bargained
with another translator for twenty-five gumeas. The second
translator was precisely in the same situation as the first ; as
ignorant, though not so well paid, as the knight. He borgamed
with a third, who perfectly understood his original, for twelve
guineas ! So that the translators who could not translate,"
says D'Israeli, " feasted on venison, and turtle, while the modest
drudge, whose name never appeared to the world, broke in
patience his daily bread ? The craft of authorship," he adds,
" has many mysteries."

The second class of literary impostors consists of forgers.
To this class belong the authors of those impostures which may
be denominated religio-literary forgeries. Such are the religious
books of all pagan nations ; the Sibylline books of the Romans,
the Koran of the Mohammedans, the Vedas of India, the Zend-
Avesta, or living wordy of the Persians and Medians, our own
apocryphal books, etc. Each of these religio-literary impos-
tures would singly afibrd ample materials for an entire article.
We shall content ourselves with this cursory mention of them
and sweep them aside en masse.

Turn we now to forgeries unconnected thus with religion.
The number, unblushing impudence, and intricate ingenuity of
such frauds task the power of belief. They are to be found in
every department of literature.

It was strenuously maintained by Father Hardouin, a French
Jesuit of great learning, that nearly all the works ascribed to
ancient authors in Greece and Rome were forged in the thir-
teenth century. He excepted from thb singular imputation
only the worfa of Cicero and Pliny the Elder, together with
some of those which bear the repute of having been written

1838.] Literary Bapostures. 47

by Horace and Virgil. The idea was an extravagant one, and
cannot for a moment be regarded with favor by any reflecting
and well-regulated mind. It is not to be denied, however, that
very many of the works which have come down to us as gen-
uine productions of the ancient authors whose names they bear
are most probably altogether spurious ; and that a far larger
number of them have undergone interpolation to a greater or
less extent. There is little reason to suppose that, of the de*
ceptions practised by the monks of the middle ages in relation
to the works of the ancients, those which have as yet eluded the
sagacity and research of the learned will ever be detected.
The probability of exposure is at least as much diminished by
the lapse of time since the perpetration of the frauds and by the
influence of prescription, as increased by the additional number
of minds engaged in the examination of the Greek and Roman
writers (so called) or by the new facilities offered to investiga-
tion. Considering the character of the middle ages in regard
to literature, we can hardly hope for any means of detecting
frauds of this nature except intemal evidence in the productions
themselves ; and, in most cases, this has long been estimated
as correctly as possible, and a verdict given accordingly. The
dim light with which the domgs of those days are and ever must
be wrapt, revealing to view scarce anything but the more prom-
inent political convulsions, though affording some casual glimpses
of literary and social phenomena, will scarce suffice to direct
our scrutiny into the lurking-places of those facts with which
we might oppose and defeat the influence of prescription as to
the genuineness of many works which are referred to the classic
periods of Greek or Roman literature.

Of the known forgeries since the Christian era and before the
dawn of letters, we will make special mention of two or three.
Philostratus, the philosopher, who flourished in the third cen-
tury, composed a life of the celebrated impostor ApoUonius
Tyaneus from records purporting to have been made by Damis,
who was not only a contemporary of ApoUonius, but his friend
and constant companion in travelling. That these records were
spurious there is clear internal evidence. Among other things,
the hero ApoUonius appears in Babylon, and thereupon a de-
scription is given of that celebrated city, not a word of which is
applicable to the period, as at that time Babylon was almost
utterly desolate, its splendor having been long since absorbed
by Seleucia.

48 Literary biypaitures. [Jan.

There is a history of the Jewish War, which passes under
the name of Hegesippus, the Jew. He lived in the reigns of
Antoninus and Commodus, i. e. in the latter half of the second
century ; and yet mention is made in this work of Constanti-
nople, Scotland, and Saxony !

Annius of Viterbo, or John Nanni, a Dominican friar of the
fifteenth century, who was made master of the sacred palace
by Pope Alexander VI., employed his leisure in the composi*
tion oi fragments which he endeavored to palm upon the world
as newly discovered remains of ancient writers. They were
comprised in seventeen books of Antiquities, as he styled his
forgeries, and bore the names of Sanchoniathon, Berosus and
others. He subsequently added commentaries, composed mainly
of forged passages ascribed to unknown authors. Tiiese. frag-
ments and commentaries were for a while extremely well-
received by many of the learned throughout Europe. The
blunders which they contained finally led to the detecUon of
their author. He died, however, without confessing the fabri-
cation, and from his respectability and pertinacity the Antiquities
have still been supposed by some to be genuine writings of the
authors to whom he ascribed tliem, or at least to have been
thus regarded by Annius. The Dominicans, that the stain of
such a forgery might not attach to their order, asserted that
Annius derived his publications firom a MS. belonging to the
Colbertine library ; but the existence of such a MS. was never
satisfactorily proved. The success of the forgery is somewhat
remarkable, though its magnitude was not very great, the whole
collection of Augments amounting to less than 200 pages. At
their first appearance they excited deep interest. Four parties
were speedily formed, one pronouncing them forgeries by
Annius, a second declaring that they were forged before the
editor's time, a third regarding them as partly genuine and
partly interpolated by the editor, and a fourth sustaining their
entire genuineness.

The papal supremacy over the countries denominated the
States of the Church originated in pretended grants made to the
popes by Pepm and Charlemagne. There is no other proof of
these grants than that contained in certain charters alleged to
have been bestowed by Louis le Debonnau-e, Otho L and Hen-
ry L Notwithstanding the strenuous efforts which have been
made by some Catholic writers to sustain the authenticity of
these charters, they are pretty generally regarded as having

1638*] LUerary knpoiiure$. 49

beeD krged to give color to the papal appropriation of the terri-
tories referred to. In likemanner, deeds and inscriptions, designed
to sustain the pretensions of the papal church in a momentous
law-suit, were forged by the Spanish antiquary Medina Conde,
and buried in the earth, where he knew they would soon be
discovered. The decretals called the decretals ofhidare, which
foimed the fundamental ground of the canon-law for eight cen-
turies, were forged in the ninth century with a view to the
maintenance of the papal authority. Isidore, archbishop of
Seville, in whose name they were fabricated, died in ^6.

Let us now descend to more modem times, and notice some
of the most remarkable forgeries vhich they present to view.
Precise chronological order in narrating them is not of conse-
quence, and will not be sought.

The first which we shall mention are those executed by one
Joseph Vella in the latter part of the last century, an account
of which we transcribe from D'Israeli. The source from which
this account b derived is not stated by D'Israeli ; and we have
not been able to discover it. In a French Biographic Univer-
selle we find a narrative differing from his in some not very
material points ; but, as Disraeli's is rather more circumstantial,
we have chosen to rely on his authority. ^^ One of the most
extraordinary literary impostures was that of one Joseph Vella,
who, in 1794, was an adventurer in Sicily, and pretended that
he possessed seventeen of the lost books of Li vy in Arabic. He
had received this literary treasure, he said, from a Frenchman^
who bad purloined it from a shelf m St. Sophia's church at Con-
stantinople. As many of the Greek and Roman classics have
been translated by the Arabians, and many were first known in
Europe in their Arabic dress, there was nothing improbable
in one part of his story. He was urged to publish these long-
desired books ; and Lady Spencer, then in Italy, offered to de-
fray the expenses. He had the effrontery, by way of speci-
men, to edit an Italian translation of the sixtieth book ; but that
book took up no more than one octavo page ! A professor of
oriental literature in Prussia introduced it into his work, never
suspecting the fraud. It proved to be nothing more than the
Epitome of Florus. He also gave out that he possessed a code
which he had picked up in the Abbey of St. Martin, containing
the ancient history of Sicily in the Arabic period, comprehend-
ing above 200 years, and of which ages their own historians
were entirely deficient in knowledge. Vella declared be bad a

Vol. XI No. 29. 7

50 Uterary Impoitures. [Jam.

genuine ofBeiai correspondence between the Arabian governors of
Sicily and their superiors in Africa, from the first landing of the
Arabians in that island. Vella was now loaded with honors and
pensions ! It is true he showed Arabic MSS., which, however,
did not contain a syllable of what he said. He pretended he
was in continual correspondence with friends at Morocco and
elsewhere. The king of Naples furnished him with money to
assist bis researches. Four volumes in quarto were at length
published. Vella had the adroitness to change the Arabic MSS.
he possessed, which entirely related to Mohammed, to matters
relative to Sicily. He bestowed several weeks' labor to disfigure
the whole, altering page for page, line for line, and word for
word ; but interspersed numberless dots, strokes, and flourishes,
so that when he published a fac-simile, every one admired the
learning of Vella, who could translate what no one else could
read. He complained he had lost an eye in this mbute labor;
and every one thought his pension ought to have been increased.
Every thing prospered about him except his eye ; which some
thought was not so bad neither. It was at length discovered by
his blunders that the whole was a forgery, though it had now
been patronized, translated, and extracted, throughout Europe.
When this MS. was examined by an Orientalist, it was discov-
ered to be nothing but a history of Mohammed and his family.
Vella was condemned to imprisonment."

Captain Francis Wilford, an Ejiglishman of great learning,
was imposed upon in a most remarkable manner, while resident
in India, by a Hindoo pundit in whom he trusted too implicitly.
His deceptions consisted of the alteration of individual proper
names in Indian MSS. which he produced, the substitution of
new leaves for the original ones, (no very difficult matter, since
Indian books are not bound like ours, but are only loosely con-
nected leaves,) and, in one instance, the forgery of two volumi-
nous sections, containing 12,000 Slocas or stanzas, which he
pretended to have faithfully extracted from the Puranas, and
which were composed in exact imitation of their usual style.
Many of these forgeries were communicated to Sir W. Jones,
who, with all his learning and philosophical caution, saw no
reason to doubt their genuineness. Captain Wilford published
in the series of volumes entitled, " Asiatic Researches," several
extensive essays which were more or less imbued with error
(one on Egypt especially,) from the reliance which he placed
on this masteriy imitator. The corrupted MSS. were preserved

1638.] Literary hyfo$twrt$. 51

by Captain Wilford^ and some years after the deception was
efiectedy he accidentally observed something peculiar ip the
appearance of the writing, which led him on, step by step, to
a complete discovery of the imposition to which be had been
subjected. His mortification, and his anxiety lest he should be
regarded by the world as a participator in the fraud, threw him
into a lingering disorder; As soon bs possible he dispatched
letters to his friends in various parts of Europe, making them
acquainted with the facts, which he also published to tiie world
soon after m a paper contained in the 8th Vol. of the Asiatic
Researches. When our notable pandit was accused of the
fraud, he immediately flew into apparent paroxysms of rage,
imprecating the vengeance of heaven upon his head if he were
not entirely innocent. Afraid that this conduct might not be
adequate to reinstate him in the good opinion of Captain Wil*
ford, he produced ten Brahmms as his compurgators, who swore
by every thing sacred in their religion that no imposition had
been committed. All was of no avail. Reprimanding the
Brahmins for their perjury. Captain Wilford rid himself at once
of them and the pundit whose fraud they had attempted to
sustain.

All our readers without doubt know something respect*
ing Lauder's temporary imposition upon the public relating to
the originality of Milton's Paradise Lost. We propose to give
a somewhat particular account of it, as minute details concern-
ing it are not very generally accessible.

It was in 1747, Uiat William Lauder first made his appear-
ance before the world in the character of a detector of Milton's
plagiarisms. In the beginning of that year he published in the
Gentleman's Magazine with the initials of his name, W. L., a
naper entitled : '^ Milton's Use and Imitation of the Modems."
Notwithstanding his pretended regret at his discovery, deep
malice was apparent in the manner in which he urged and dis-
cussed the alleged obligation of Milton to other writers. This
spirit induced a severity of inference on the part of Lauder far
from being warranted by the circumstances asserted, even had
they been true ; and three several replies appeared in the col-
umns of the same magazine, all admitting the truth of the facts
presented, but resisting, we should rather say deprecating, the
asperity of Lauder's deductions from them. Emboldened by
this impunity, (for impunity it was comparatively, considering the
actual extent (h his criminality,) be, in the beginning of the year

I

52 Literary inpostures. [Jan.

1750, in accordance with a promise contained in the paper just
mentioned, published a larger essay under the same title as the
smaller, but in a volume by itself. This work was adorned with
a preface and a postscript from the vigorous pen of the celebra-
ted Dr. Johnson. Dr. Symmons, in his Lite of Milton, states
it as probable from Johnson's known connexion with Cave, the
editor of the Gentleman's Magazbe, that he was intimately con*
ceroed in Lauder's former essay ; but this is by no means satis-
factorily evinced.

In the article and the volume of which we have spoken. Mil-*
ton was accused of having derived many of his images and
thoughts, and even many of his forms of expression, from Gro-
tius, and several other modern writers, of little note in our day,
whatever was theu* reputation in their own. The chief writers
designated by Lauder, besides Grotius, were Masenius, a Jesuit,
Taubmann, a German professor, and Staphorstius, a Dutch di-
vine. To support his charge, he adduced passages, as from
these writers, which did indeed bear a wonderful, a more than
accidental, resemblance to passages pointed out in Milton's
Paradise Lost, and were sometimes completely identical with
them, except diat in the one case the passages were in Latin
and in the other in Ejiglish. On the strength of this corres-

Kodence, Lauder allowed himself the most unlimited abuse of
ilton, terming him ^^ an unlicensed plagiary," accusing him of
*^ an industrious concealment of his helps," of conduct " highly
ungenerous," " absolutely unworthy of any man of probity and
honor," "criminal to the last degree." " Mankind," says he,
" by giving too implicit a faith to the bold assertion of our poet, that
be sung things unattempied yet, have been deluded into a false
opinion of Milton's being more an original author than any poet
ever was before him. This opinion, and this only, has been the
cause of that infinite tribute of veneration that has been paid
bim these sixty years past. Hence so many editions, transla-
tions, commentaries, lives, encomiums, marble busts, pictures,
gold and silver medals." He attributed the well-known circum-
stance, that Milton would not teach his daughters to understand
tlie languages which they were in the habit of reading to him,
to his fear that they would recognize his plagiarisms. In con-
clusion of his treatise he made a solemn assertion of the purity
of his motives and an apology for the severity of bis remarks.
The volume was inscribed to the Universities of Oxford add
Cambridge.

1888.] Literary lmpaiture$* 53

•

The Acts which Lauder alleged weie not disputedin print
for a great while after their puUication. Nor is this strange ;
lor who could imagine that his book was an unmingled tissue of
imposture. The very impudence of his enterprise protected
him. Hb triumph was undisturbed for nearly a year. At the
end of that perioc!, howerer, the fine fiibric he had constructed was
dissipated to the winds, and he was degraded from the patronage
and society of the great to his proper estimation ; he became a
thing at which general indignation and contempt were directed.
In 1751, Dr. Douglas published a letter to the Earl of Bath, en-
titled " Mihon vindicated from the Charge of Plagiarism,'' which,
in a temperate but mercilessly thorough manner exposed the
vile arts of Lauder, and rescued Milton's towering fame from
bis malicious assault.

The lines of Milton himself in the very poem so ranoorously
vilified, which describe the efiisct produced by the touch of
Itburiel's spear upon the visible form of Satan, as he sat ^^ squat,
like a toad, close at the ear of Eve," will not perhaps be regard-
ed as entirely inapposite. Lauder was, we know,

^ Blown up with high conceits, eagenderiog pride.
Him thus intent Ithuriei with iiis spear
Touched lightly ; for no falsehood can endure
Touch of celestial temper, but returns,
Of force, to its own likeness. Up he starts,
Discovered and surprised. As, when a spark
Lights on a heap of nitrous powder, laid
Fit for the tun, some magazine to store
Against a rumored war» the smutty grain,
With sudden blaze dijSiised, inflames the air ;
8o started up in his own shape the fiend."

Dr. Douglas was then rector of Eton Constantine in Shrop-
shire, England. This letter was his first literary production.
He (Ued in 1807, bishop of Salisbury. When Lauder's book
first came into bis hands, and for a considerable time after
its perusal, he, like others, did not once imagine it possible that
the works referred to by Lauder wanted the passages ostensi-
Uy quoted from them ; although he considered the deductions
firom the premises as unwarrantably harsh, and was ready
to maintain, as he does in the first part of the letter which dis-
closed Lauder's firaud, that, even admitting all the premises, no
could be drawn to Milton's discredit. In this idea be

54 Literary lnfpo$turei. [Jan.

was undoubtedly misled by his veneratioii for the great poet ;
for nothing could be said in censure of any plagiarisms whatso-
ever, if we allow the character of innocence to those which M3-
ton must have committed, bad Lauder been veracious in his
quotadons.

In the summer of 1750, Dr. D. went to reside for a while at
the University of Oxford. Curiosity, along with the unusual
facility of gratifying it which his situation afforded, induced him
to make search for the books to which Lauder referred. Many
of them were so rare as not to be procurable even at Oxford.
The two to which Lauder had made most frequent reference,
that of Masenius and the Adamus Exstd of Grotius were not
to be found. Those which he did obtain, however, revealed
the imposition, probably unparalleled in point of hardihood,
which Milton's detractor had practised upon the world. The
first circumstance, which forcibly attracted Dr. D.'s attention,
was that in every case Lauder omitted telling his readers in
what part of the woric to which reference was made the pre-
tended quotation was to be found. This laid him under the
necessity of tumbg over an entire volume page by page in
order to find the lines alleged to be a citation.

Dr. Douglas's examination resulted in the disclosure that, of
the lines adduced, those which bore any special resemblance to
Milton's were invariably wantbg in the original, and were there-
fore interpolated by Lauder. Dr. D. did not even leave Lau-
der the merit of havmg himself composed all the Latin verses
that he had foisted into the productions which he pretended to
quote with fairness. ''The lines are good CHies," says he,
^' and therefore let us give the honor of them to their real au-
thor." He discovered that nearly all of them were derived
from a Latin translation of the Paradise Lost, Paradise Regained,
and Samson Agonistes, executed by William Hogg, or Hogsus,
as he calls himself on the title-page, and printed at London in
1690. Thus Milton was branded and reviled as a plagiary for
having itolenfram himself! " It seems so extremely improb-
able," says Dr. Douglas, " that any one should ever venture to
put so gross an imposition on the world, that I almost despair
of being believed, although I know the certainty of the fact."

Dr. Douglas also points out in Lauder's assertions many in-
consistencies and extreme absurdities, such as always accom-
Sany very complicated deception. For example, he charged
[ilton with stealing the comparison of Eve to Pandora, in

1888.] Literary hupottuxu. S5

Bode IV. of Par. Lost, from both Masenius and Malapertius;
baving undoubtedly forgotten, wben he ascribed its origin to
the latter, that he had already ascribed it to the former. In
one part of bis book he said, that the 11th and 12th Books of
the Par. Lost were a copy of Rosse's VirgiUus Ehangelizans ;
in another Du Bartas shares the honor of being their original ;
and in another still, Barlaeus is said to have furnished ** the
prima stamina of the best part of the last two books of Para-
dise Lost."

The most amazing instance of effiontery in the whole tissue
of his firauds is yet to be noticed. In lus ISrst essay, in the
Gentlemen's Magazine of Feb. 1747, he actually forged apas-
satrefor Milton himself, and then asseited that it was an imita-»
tion of two lines which be adduced from Grotius and which are
truly cited ! Such impudence is astounding ! The passage
forged was as follows :

" And lakes of living sulphur ever flow.
And ample epaces."

When Dr. Douglas's Letter appeared, Lauder's booksellers
at once told him, much to their honor, that he must either dis-
prove the charges it contained, or they should publicly disclaim
all further connexion with him. H!e unblushingly owned his
fraud, and they circulated an advertisement declaring that before
the publicatbn of the exposure they had no knowledge of his
dishonesty, and excusing themselves by saying, that the man's
apparent incapacity to contrive such a scheme of deception had
precluded suspicion.

Dr. Johnson wrote for Lauder a letter of contrition to Dr.
Douglas, and forced its publication. It is said that this letter,
which runs tn a- strain at extreme humility, by no means ex-
pressed the real feelings of Lauder at the time. At any rate,
be subsequently retracted it ; and, three or four years later,
published an additional pamphlet against Milton of the most
malignant character. It produced no effect in his favor. He
retired to Barbadoes in the West Indies, and died, about the
year 1771, in merited poverty and obscurity.

The interest excited in the public mind by this imposture
and its detection is well described by the celebrated bishop
Warburton in a letter which we find in one of the volumes of
Nichols's Literary Anecdotes. ^' Lauder has afforded much
amusement for the public, and they are obliged to him. What

5S Literary bipa$iure$. [Jam.

the public wants, or subsists on, is news, Milton was their
reigning favorite ; yet they took it well of a man they bad never
heard of before, to tell them the news of Milton being a thief
and a plagiary. When this was no longer news, they were
equally delighted with another, as much a stranger to them,
who entertained them with anotiier piece of news, that Lauder
was a plagiary and impostoTk^'

It should be noticed, that although Dr. D. first disclosed in
print the facts relative to this imposition, the merit of the ^rt^
discovery^ as Dr. D. himself ingenuously states in his Letter,
belongs to another, a Mr. Bowie of Oriel College, Oxford, who
generously communicated to the former considerable aid in un-
masking Milton's detractor.

The motives which led Lauder (how inappropriate a nanoe !
lucus A nan Iwendoy) to the perpetration of this bold fraud have
never been ascertained ; or at least, if they have, they were
exceedingly disproportionate to the danger and infamy of expo-
sure. In the penitential letter to Dr. Douglas, he (or rather
Dr. Johnson for him) assigns so puerile a reason for his conduct,
that, it would seem, no considerate mmd could for a moment
suppose it the real one. In Nichols's Illustrations of the Lite-
rature of the Eighteenth Century there is a private letter of Lau-
der's to Dr. Mead, dated April 9th, 1751, in which he gives
another and equally puerile account of the cause of his pro-
cedure, alleging a desire to retaliate on Milton for having
attempted, as Milton's enemies have often asserted on no just
grounds, to deprive Charles I. of the reputed authorship of the
work called Eikon Badlike. The fictitious story to which
Lauder referred is, that Milton stole a prayer from Sir Philip
Sidney's Arcadia, and, by means of " severe penalties and
threatenings," compelled the printer of the Eikon BanUke to
subjoin it to his miyesty's production ; intending to make the
world believe that, as his majesty was not the author of that
prayer, he was not the author of any portion of the book.
'^ Fallere fallentem non est fraus," was Lauder's attempt at ex-
culpation.

Dr. Johnson's connection with Lauder has been much harped
upon by the enemies of that great man ; and some of the facts
in relation to it wear, it must be confessed, rather an undeara-
ble aspect. Probably, however, he is not justly chargeable
with anything more seriously derogatory than too great readi-
ness to believe Lauder's assertions. Tins sprang fton his well-

18S8,] IMerofy tnpoHwres. 5T

known distftste for MHton's politics, which has imparted undue
severity to the criticisms on Milton's poetry which he presented
to the readers of the Rambler, and led him to unfair estimation
of Milton's character generally. As to the assertion of Sir
John Hawkins in his memoirs of Dr. Johnson, that, while the
sheets of Lauder's Essay were passing through the press,
*^ Johnson seemed to exult in the persuasion that the reputation
of Milton was likely to suffer by this discovery," although it
has been pronounced by some a base calumny, we do not hesi-
tate to admit the probability of its correctness ; for, with all
Johnson's greatness of mind, he bad a very remarkable degree
of human frailty.

The poems of Ossian, presented to the world by Macpherson,
are very generally regarded as an imposture. Chatterton's for>
geries, also, have attracted great notice. Much mystery still
adheres to them. D'Israeli declares that in his opinion the tale
has been but half told. We refer thus cursorily to the supposed
frauds of Macpherscxi and Chatterton because they were not
long smce discussed by the writer of an article in the North
American Review, entitled " British Poetry during the latter
part of the last century." If this Reviewer has erred at all, it
is probaUy in respect to the extent of Macpherson's deception,
and the error is far from being on the side of lenity. We are
disposed to think that the so-called poems of Ossian are, for
the most part at least, based upon poetical legends actually
current in the highlands of Scotiand, many of which were gen*
uine productions of a bard named Ossian.

William Henry Ireland rendered himself notorious by attempt-
ing frauds upon the public in relation to the writings of Shak-
speare. After disseminating several minor imitations, he became
90 completely demented as to endeavor to palm off an entire
drama of his own composition as the production of the prince
of English poets. A volume of the pretended relics appeared
in 17S6. We have not space to speak particularly of them.
Suffice it to introduce some lines inscribed by the Rev. William
Mason (author of The English Garden, Elfrida, and other
poems) below a portrait of William Henry Ireland. The other
forgers referred to in them are Lauder, Macpherscm, and Chat-
terton.

'^Foar forgers bom in one prolific age,
Much critical acumen did engage ;
The first was soon by doughty Douglas scared,
Vol. XI. No. 29. 8

56 Literary hnpoitures. [Jan.

Though Johnaon would have screened binii bad he dared ;

The next had all the cunning of a Scot ;
The third invention, genius, nay, what not ?
Fraud, now exhausted, only could dispense
To his fourth son their three fold impudence."*

. Many playful literary impositions have been practised upon the
public and upon individuals, which are commonly set down as
mere jeux d'esprit^ deservbg slight, if any, reprehension. A
strict moralist, however, can hardly pronounce them innocent.
George Steevens,tbe commentator on Shakspeare, practised in
the course of his very eccentric life, a great many impositions
upon the credulity of antiquaries and weak-minded persons of
all classes. They were, most of them at least, prompted rather
by humor than by any malignant design. The &mous story
uespecting the Upas tree of Java, ^^ the effluvia of which, through
a district of twelve or fourteen miles, had Idlled all vegetation,
and had spread the skeletons of men and animak, affi>rding a
scene of melancholy beyond what poets have described or
painters delineated," is said to owe its origin to Steevens. He

fublished it in the London Magazine as an extract from a
>utch traveller, in whose work, however, no one could ever
discover it. The many fictions of this nature which appeared
in the London papers during the literary career of Steevens are
ascribed by many almost en masse to Steevens, from the fact
tbat several have been satisfactorily traced to his pen.

The younger Scaliger was, as was his father likewise, of an
arrogant disposition, and plumed himself much on his supposed
infallibility of judgment concerning matters of ancient literature.
Muretus, with a mischievous intent to expose him to ridicule,
sent him some verses purporting to have been copied from an
old MS. Scaliger was entrapped, and affirmed at once that
they were written by an old comic author named Trabeus.
He cited them as precious relics of antiquity in a commentary
on Varro's work De Re Rustica. Muretus thereupon disclosed
the deception, and Scaliger was deservedly humbled.

Horace Walpole, being at Paris in 1765, wrote a letter to
Rousseau in French, purporting to come from Frederic, king of
Prussia, which produced the effect anticipated by its author*
The extravagant conduct of Rousseau, upon an occurrence

* The writer of theae lines evidently had in mind Diyden's Epi-
gram on Milton.

1838.] IMerary bnposturu. 09

which keenly probed his singular vanity and self-consequence,
afforded much amusement. Waipole, be it remembered, was
the very man who spumed the unhappy Chatterton, upon dis-
covering that the poems, which he published in the name of
Rowley and other ancient writers, were written by himself.

If there was ever an innocent literary deception it was that
of Mr. Burke in regard to his " Vindication of Natural Society,'*
which bore on its title page the words : By a late noble Writer,"
meanmg Lord Bolingbroke. So completely did he attain the
intended similarity in thought and expression, that many of
great sagacity admitted without hesitation the genuineness of
the work, and some even praised it above Lord Bolingbroke's
best performances. The production was ironical ; it was de-
signed to show thatf on the same principles of reasoning which
had been followed by the ^^ noble writer" in the maintenance
of his skepticism concerning Christianity, the expediency of
political society might be disputed likewise. During the
French Revolution, this same ironical composition of Burke's
younger days was republished in England, as a piece of serious
argument, by some of the admirers df those principles of anar-
chy under the venomous influence of which the French nation
was then writhing in political convulsions.

The third general division of our subject relates to those who
have published intentional untruth, as to the matters of fact
which they state in their productions. We have already, how-
ever, extended our remarks to such a length as to preclude an
examination of any of these frauds. In number and singularity
they equal those which we have before noticed. That very
extraordinary individual, George Psalmanazar, leads the host
which enfilades before our mind's eye in view of this part of
the subject of Literary Impostures. His autobiography is, we
think, extremely entertaining, although D'Israeli pronounces it
tedious.

A work on the literary impositions which have been perpe-
trated upon the public, besides being replete with interest^
would be productive of considerable other advantage. It would
furnish an important subject of study m the great science of
human nature ; exhibiting peculiar, cultivated specimens of
criminality.

fiO AivancemetU <ff BibUcal Knowledge. [Jan.

ARTICLE IV.
Tas Advanceiisnt of Biblical Knowledge.*

By B. P. Bftrrowi, Profenor of Biblical Liter&Urt Id the Waitorn KettrTe Colleg •.

" All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, ftnd is profit-
able for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instroction in
righteousness ; that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly
furnished unto all good works." These are the words of an
aged apostle, addressed to a youthful minister of Christ. The
general truth which they assert is, that the holy Scriptures,
given by inspiration of God, constitute a perfect rule for the
direction of the christian teacher in all circumstances ; and that
his perfection as a teacher consists in a perfect understanding of
their principles, doctrines, and precepts. From the rich treasury
of GoA's word, he is to fumisn himself with sound doctrine for
the illumination of the minds of those over whom the Holy
Spirit has made him overseer ; fix>m its bright and glorious
principles, he is to convince men of sin, and put to silence gain-
savers ; from its precepts, he is to reclaim offenders, rectify
what is amiss in the church, and train up her members to holi-
ness and usefulness. If the Scriptures of the Old Testament
merited the high eulogium of the apostle, how much more the
sacred canon as we now possess it, complete in all its parts,
containing not only the writings of " Moses and the prophets,"
bat also the words of Christ and his apostles ! Of this it may
be said with emphasis, that the man of God who fully under-
stands the truths which it embodies, and how to apply these
truths skilfully to the wants of his people, is " perfect, thor-
oughly fiimished unto all good works" pertaining to hb office.

The grand business, therefore, of every one who aspires to the
^ork of the christian ministry, is to learn vfhat truths the
Scriptures contain, and how to apply these truths to the under-
standings and consciences of men. The former is accomplished
by study ; the latter, mainly by practice. Both are Indispen-
sably necessary to constitute an efficient minister of the gospel ;
^* a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing
the word of truth." The present occasion, however, leads us

* This article was delivered by the author as an Inaugural Ad-
dress* EiO.

leae.] Advtmement of Biblkal SmuiMg^ 61

to eooflder more particularly that branch of mii^sierial qualifi*
catko which oomists in a tbotoagh acquaiatance . with God's
word.

In pursuing this subject we sbaU inquire, first : What is in*-
volyed m a thorough knowledge of Scripture ? and, secondly :
How can this knowledge be most e£bctually diffused through*
out the christian ministry ?

L What does a thorough knowledge of Scripture involve ?

1. It involves a thorough acquaintance with the original lan-
guages of the sacred volume. This proposition, few, if any,
will be inclined to dispute. We have a most excellent traosla*
tioo of the Scriptures into our vernacular tongue. For this in-
estimable boon we Uess the God of our fathers. The sound
learning and judgment of its authors, their freedom from a sec^
tariao spirit, their scriipufeus fidelity, and the majestic simplicity
of their style are worthy of all praise. This translation we
have ever been ready to defend against the cavils and mueodoes
of superficial smatterers in sacred literature, and have felt that
those sects, or firagments of sects, who find it in the way of
their fiivorite dogmas, have a bad cause to maintain. Still, it
is but a translation^ and no translatioQ, however perfect, can
fiiUy express all the ddicate shades of meaning and connections
of thought that belong to the ori^al. Moreover, since its ex-
ecution, biblical science has enjoyed the advantage of moite
than two centuries of investigation and researdi, in the progress
of which much additional light has been elicited. In some few
cases (not involving any fundamental doctrine or precept) it is
generally admitted that the translators have erred ; in more
still, the sense which they have expressed is one of two or
QKMre, ^ther of which may be the true meaning of the original.
Their '< various readmgs" show that they themselves often hes-
itated as to the manner in whksh a particular word or phrase
should be rendered. With all due deference, therefore, to
these venerable men, we maintain that it is the duty of the man
of God, to consult the origlhal oracles of divine truth, and to
judge for himself of their meaning. Tins was the doctrine of
our pilgrim ancestors ; it has ever been the doctrine of their
descendants to the present day ; and we mean to band it down
in its purity to our posterity.

2. A thorough knowledge of Scripture involves an acquaint-
ance with the geography, and antiquities of aooieot Palestine,
and of the sunounding nalioaa with whose history that of the

63 Advaneemeni of Biblical Knowledge. [Jan*

children of Israel is connected. The eager demand for this
species of knowledge among the conductors of Sabbath schools,
Bible classes, and others who desire to qualify themselves for
the work of expounding the word of God to the rising genera-
tion, (a demand which has called forth some of the noblest in-
tellectual efforts of the age,) is a commentary on its value which
all can read and understand. Without the light which it affords,
no one can clearly apprehend the force of the numerous allu-
sions to the location and relative position of the cities and civil
divisions of Palestine, and of the surrounding nations ; to their
natural scenery, climate, and productions ; and to the manners
and customs of society ; which crowd almost every page of in-
spiration. Who, for example, can intelligently read the narra-
tive of the apostle Paul's joumies and labors, without an ac-
quaintance with the natural and civil geography of the regions
over which he traveUed ? Who, that does not understand the
posture in which the ancients were accustomed to take their
meals, can comprehend how " a certain woman" could stand at
our Saviour's feet " behind him^^^ while he was " at meat in
the Pharisee's house," could wash his feet with her tears, wipe
them with the hairs of her head, kiss them, and anoint them
with ointment ? Who can fully understand the parable of the
ten virgins without a knowledge of oriental nuptial ceremonies ?
The above are a few obvious examples, selected from among
many hundreds equally striking. Nor must the biblical student
limit himself to the geography and antiquities of the Jews. In
the course of their eventful history, the people of God were
brought into contact with all the great monarchies of the ancient
world, and fix>m the geography and antiquities of all these are
illustrations of Scripture to be sought. In the New Testament,
more especially, Jewish, Grecian, and Roman geography and
archaeology are all blended together, and are all indispensable
to a full elucidation of the sacred page.

3. A thorough knowledge of Scripture involves an enlarged
acquaintance with ancient history. We have remarked above
that (jod in his providence brought his ancient people succes-
sively into contact with all the great monarchies of the earth.
Let It be remembered that this was not for a day, or a month,
or a year, but for long periods of time ; not when these mon-
archies were in their infancy, but when they were in their
prime of glory and strength. It seems ever to have been Jeho-
vah's plan to place his chosen people in the very heart of the

1888.] Aioaneemeni of Biblical Knowledge. 63

civiliaed world, a conspicuous object of attention to all the sur-
rounding nations. To the north and east, they had the great
Assyrian, Babylonian, and Persian empires ; to the south,
Egypt ; to the west, Greece and Rome. Thus, while God
kept them constantly surrounded by the instruments of his
pleasure, he made them, in turn, a spectacle to the world,
whether in victory or defeat, whether exalted by his favor above
their enemies, or sunk by his frown beneath their iron yoke.
Hence the history of ancient Israel becomes the leading element
in the hbtory of mankind before the Messiah's advent, even as
the history of the christian church is the leading element since
that era. Take away this element from the annals of antiqui-
ty, and they are left, like the primeval chaos, " without form
and void, and darkness is upon the face of the deep." Restore
it, and all beocxnes order, harmony, and unity of design. We
see one empire springing into exbtence at the fiat of Jehovah,
that it may be the instrument in his hand of accomplishing
some deep and glorious purpose respecting his church, and
then sinking into its original nothing, to make room for another,
destined, in-like manner, to subserve the interests of Zion. It
is no exaggeration to say that the record of God's dealings with
his church is the key to the universal history of mankind ; and
that her destmies are the hinge upon which the destinies of all
nations have ever turned. Viewed in this light, how important
does prdane history become ! Isolated from sacred history, it
is but a barren and disgusting detail of human passions and
crimes ; but studied in connection with it, every page is lumi^
nous with instruction. What is it but a part and parcel of
(rod's stupendous plan of subjecting all nations to the reign of
the Messiah 7

Profane history, moreover, is the Jcey of prophecy. How
many predictions were uttered by the ancient prophets whose
iiilfilment is nowhere recorded in the Bible ! Many of these
related to periods prior to the advent of Christ ; others have
been accomplished since that day ; others, again, are yet future ;
but the interpretation of all is to be sought firom the page of
uninspired Ustory.

4. A thorough knowledge of Scripture involves an acquaint-
ance with the internal history of the ancient worid, that is, with
its moral, religious, and political condition. The Mosaic econ-
omy was designed to be mtroductory to a nobler dispensation.
Its perfection (the Holy Ghost being judge) was not ab$ohUe,

64 Advancemeni of BihKcal KiawUdge* [Jan*

like the perfection of the Gospel, but rtlaiive, as a means to
secure a further end, having reference to the existing ciicuni*
stances of mankind. Whoever, therefore, would judge correct-
ly of its provisions, must understand both the final end which
it proposed to accomplish, the mecms which it selected for secur*
ing this end, and the adaptation of these means to the condi-
tion of the world. Many captious objections, for example,
which have been urged against the policy which it prescribed
with reference to the surrounding idolatrous nations, might have
been spared, had their authors well understood the bearing of
this policy upon the great end of this dispensation, which was
to establish upon an immovable basis the doctrine of Jehovah's
unity and infinite perfections, in opposition to the polytheism
and image-worship that then prevailed throughout the world,
that thus the way might be prepared for the mtroduction oS the
christian dispensation. The same remarks are, to a great extent,
applicable to the New Testament. Without an acquaintance
with the moral, religious, and political condition of the worid at
the period of our Seiviour's advent, we cannot fully enter into
the meaning of many passages which occur in the writings of the
evangelists and apostles. For want of this knowledge, many a
sincere inquirer after truth has felt himself greatly ^nbanassed
and perplexed in the commencement of his investigations. But,
as his acquaintance with the internal history of the ancient world
has gradually increased, his difficulties one after another have
vanished ; light has succeeded to darkness, and order to con-
fusion.

5. A thorough knowledge oi Scripture involves an acquaiBt-
ance with the laws of human language. For the BiUe, though
containing a revelation from God, is expressed in the ordinary
language of common life, and is to be interpreted accordingly.

Whatever advantages we may imagine that we can secure to
the cause of truth (or what we esteem the cause of truth) by
deviating bota the well established principles of interpretation
which are employed in ascertaining the meaning of all other writ-
ten documents, we shall find to our cost that, like the apocalyptic
book, they are only sweet at the first taste. For one argument
on the side of truth which can be thus wrested from Scripture,
ten can, by the same method, be gained m behalf of eiror.
How many forced ccMostructions of dbe most simple passages of
God's word would a rigid adherence to the laws of ioierpre-
tioo have prevented ! — and how much angry logomachy!

1888.] Adtimceiaufnt of Biblical KMwhige. 65

6* A thorough knowledge of Scripture involves an acquaint-
ance with the constitution of roan considered as an intellectual
and moral being. The word of God addresses itself to the
whole complex nature of man, his understanding, his natural
and moral susceptibilities, his powers of free agency. The
more thoroughly, therefore, the minister of the gospel under-
stands human nature, in the most enlarged sense of the term,
the more clearly will he apprehend the great principles of rev-
elation, which all address themselves to human nature ; and the
more skilfully will he be enabled to apply these principles in the
interpretation of the inspired volume. There is a philosophy,
" falsely so called," which " leads to bewilder, and dazzles to
blind ; " but true philosophy will always be found in perfect
harmony with divine' truth, for the book of the human mind,
and the book of revelation, are both from God, and the one can-
not contradict the other. We do not advocate the introduction
of metaphysical subtleties into the pulpit. This is not their
place. But we would have the man of God, when he enters
the pulpit, understand the intellectual and moral constitution
of the immortal minds upon which he is to operate. The more
of this substantial philosophy he possesses, the better.

If, in the above attempt to show what is involved in a
thorough knowledge of Scripture, we have not confined our-
selves exclusively to the field of sacred literature, we hope we
shall be pardoned for the digression. We wished to lay a foun-
dation broad enough for the superstructure which we intend pre-
sently to rear upon it, and, in doing this, we could not well con-
fine ourselves within the limits of any one branch of theologi-
cal knowledge.

We cannot dismiss this part of our subject without adding
that a right state of heart is indispensable to the successful study
of Scripture. The Bible is not an abstract code of laws that
can be examined with cool indifference, as one studies the laws
of a foreign nation ; nor is it a mere record of human transactions,
like the histories of Greece and Rome. It is a code of laws
indeed, but one which lays its broad claims upon the conscience
of each individual who reads it, demanding of him instant and
unreserved obedience : it is a history, but a history of God's
proceedings with this apostate world, in which he has clearly
developed the principles upon which he will deal with us
through time and through eternity. It opposes itself directly to
human pride and selfishness in every possible form ; requiring

Vol. XI. No. 29. 9

66 Advancement of Biblical Knowledge^ [Jait,

all to acknowledge their guilt and desert of eternal death, to
submit themselves unreservedly to the authority of Christ, and
to transfer their afiections from earth to heaven. Is it not self-
evident that the man who comes to the study of such a book,
with a heart under the dominion of pride and earthly affections,
will be constantly liable to err through the influence of passioo
and prejudice ? How can he candidly examine and judge of a
, system of truth that comes mto perpetual conflict with his daily
habits and feelings ? Men's hearts govern their heads, not their
heads their hearts, as we may. see every day illustrated in all the
transactions of life. It was in view of this all-important truth
that our Saviour uttered these memorable words, <^ If any man
will do his," (God's) " will, he shall know of the doctrme,"
(which I preach) ^^ whether it be of God, or whether I speak
of myself. We find from experience that an obedient, humble,
an4 devout state of mind, is an indispensable prepajratioo for
the successful investigation of truth. Let him who aspires to the
office of the christian ministry bring to the study of the sacred ora-
cles such a preparation ; let him superadd all the subsidiary aids
above enumerated ; then, let him study the system of truth contaio-
ed in the Holy Scriptures as one harmonious whole, endeavoring
to see and understand the mutual connection and dependence of
all its parts. Thus may he become " a workman that needeth
not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.''

11. We come now to inquire, how a thorough knowledge of
the holy Scriptures can be most effectuaUy diffiised throughout
the ministry.

To this inquiry we reply, it is necessary, in the first place, that
we should have some men in the church who shall press every
department of biblical and theological learning to its utmost
limits ; and, in tlie second place, that the great body of the
christian ministry should receive such an education as will ena«
ble them to avail themselves of the results of these investiga-
tions. This proposition divides itself into two parts, each of
which will be separately considered.

1. We must have some men in the church who shall press
every department of biblical and theological learning to its utmost
limits. In no other way has any department of human know-
ledge ever been carried to a high degree of perfection^ The
splendid discoveries in the natural sciences which have so greatly
flplarged the dominion of mind over matter, have, with scarce
an exception, been made by men who were determined to

1838.] AdvancMient of Biblical Knowledge. 67

know all that could be known of that department of nature
which they had selected as their field of investigation. The
same remark holds true with respect to philology, history,
geography, and archaeology in all its diversified forms. It is
only narrow-minded ignorance that inquires, ^' Of what use is
all this waste of precious time, of strength, and of intellect ? this
plunging into the arcana of nature ? this squandering of years
in poring over the musty records of antiquity ? When there is
80 much to be done in the world, why not devote ourselves to
pursuits of practical utility ?'' Aye, but how are we to ascer-
tain beforehand the practical utility of knowledge ? Did those
who first began to inquire into the nature of steam know that
their inquiries were to result in the production of the steam-
engine ? Some century and a half ago it might have been
thought a very idle and unprofitable employment for a philoso-
pher gravely to watch the effects of steam upon^ the lid of a
tea-kettle, and to institute a series of laborious experiments for
the purpose of ascertaining its properties. His neighbors might
very naturally have rebuked him for wasting so much precious
time in an investigation which could not possibly be of any ad-
vantage to the world ; and that too at a period when the im-
provement of navigation, internal communication, and the me-
chanical arts presented such a wide field of profitable labor.
But now, taught by experience, we have learned the folly of
attempting to decide beforehand the practical value of know-
ledge. Were further illustrations needed, the history of modem
science and literature would furnish them in great 'abundance.
Nor is the history of biblical literature since the reformation
less replete with instruction on this point. As its several de-
partments have been, from time to time, advanced beyond their
previous limits, new and unexpected light has been shed upon
one portion afler another of the sacred volume. Its great fun-
damental doctrines, written as with a sunbeam upon every page
in characters so legible that " he who runs may read," have
remained " without variableness or shadow of turning." But,
while the doctrines themselves have continued immutable from
generation to generation, many important illustrations of these
doctrines, that needed the light of philology, or history, or geog-
raphy, or archaeology, or which were involved in the mists of
&lse philosophy and erroneous principles of interpretation, have
been freed firom the obscurity that rested upon them, and made
to shine forth in the simplicity and beauty of truth, not indeed

68 Adoancement of Biblical KntowUdgt. [Jak.

establishing, but still greatly adoniiDgy the fundamental doo
trines of revelation. Even firom those investigations that have
been undertaken and prosecuted without immediate reference
to divine truth, what unexpected light has sometimes been
thrown upon some obscure passage, or some controverted point
of scriptural history ! Of this the labors of the ChampoUions
and their co-adjutors are an illustrious instance.

We trust enough has been said to show the importance of
pushing every department of biblical knowledge to its utmost
limits. But by whom shall this work be performed ? We
answer, individuals must devote themselves to its several de-
partments, according as their education, their native turn of
mmd, their station, and their means shall direct. It cannot be
performed by the mass of the christian ministry, for they have
not the requisite time and apparatus. Whoever hopes mate-
rially to enlarge the boundaries of any one of its branches, will
need to devote to it many years of patient and laborious inves-
tigation. Take, for example, the department of Hebrew lexi-
cography. The Hebrew has been for twenty-three centuries a
dead language. In its words, in its grammatical inflections,
and in its idioms it differs widely from the languages of Europe,
ancient or modem. Moreover all the monuments of this lan-
guage are comprised within the compass of one volume. Many
words occur but once or twice, and then, oftentimes, in con-
nections that throw little or no light upon their signification.
The lexicographer who would contribute any thing valuable to
this important department, must first carefully examine and col-
late the sacred text ; then, in difficult passages, he must con-
sult the ancient versions and paraphrases ; where these fail to
give satisfactory results, he must resort to a comparison of the
cognate dialects, as the Aramaean, Arabic, and Ethiopic. How
many years of study and research will th'is employment con-
sume ! So the departments of ancient history, archaeology,
etc., present immense fields of investigation, enough and more
than "^ough to exhaust the energies of the man who aims at
their v^rmanent advancement. But though the prime of his
strength be thus concentrated to a single point, let it not be
supposed that it is either wasted or unprofitably spent. Those
who are accustomed to estimate men's labors only by their im-
mediate visible results, may speak lightly of him as a mere
book- worm, a recluse that is of no service to mankind ; but
the lovers of sacred learning will better appreciate his toib, and

1638.] Advancem/mt of Biblical EiwulUdge. 69

he mnll have the satisfaction of knowing that while he has la-
boredy other men will enter into his labors. There is no dan-
ger at the present day that any valuable discovery in sacred
fiterature wiU be lost. Once registered on the printed page, it
will become an advanced position from which others will push
forward their investigations to a still further limit ; and their
labors will become in turn the basis of future discoveries.
Thus, each generation availing itself of the labors of its prede-
cessors, and urging forward every department of sacred learn-
ing to its extreme limits, the most glorious results to the cause
of truth, may be confidently anticipated.

2. The great body of the christian ministry must receive
such an education as shall enable them to avail themselves of
the results of the investigations of others. We shall here ex-
clude the previous mental discipline which the academical
course of study is designed to furnish, and speak only of that
education which is strictly theological. With this limitation we
would say that the education of which we speak must include
a thorough introduction to the several departments of biblical
and theological knowledge. This introduction will embrace an
acctirate acquaintance with the elementary principles, the modes
of investigation, the sources of knowledge, and the means of
deciding controverted points, that pertain to each. To these
may be added more or less of its details, according as its na-
ture, or the circumstances of the student may dictate. For an
illustration of this position take the department of ancient his-
tory. Whoever would reap the benefit of the elaborate inves-
tigations of those who have devoted their lives to the study of
this subject, must make himself familiar with all its great out-
lines, — the order and succession of the different monarchies
with which the history of the Israelitish nation is connected,
their relative position and political connections, and especially
with the synchronisms of sacred and profane history ; with the
sources of ancient history, and the principles upon which their
comparative authority is to be determbed ; and, finally, with
various methods which learned men have proposed for reconcil-
ing contradictions either in chronology or in matters of fact.
Then he will be prepared to av^ himself of all the light which
may fix>m time to time be shed upon this department by the
toils of others. Otherwise, his views will be so chaotic and
confused that he can neither prosecute it himself to advantage

70 Advancement ofBUblied BmuIUJ^. {Jak.

(unless indeed he is willing to commence anew) nor intelli-
gently judge of the results of other men's labors.

For another illustration, take the department of language.
The man who has made himself accurately acquainted with the
original languages of Scripture is prepared mtelligently to ex-
amine and judge of the results of the investigations of those
who have devoted their lives to the subject. Otherwise these
results can be of no service to him, except so far as he is willing
to take the ipse dixit of the translator or commentator for truth.
For the want of three years' training in the original languages of
Scripture, he loses the fruit of thirty years of incessant toil and
research ; nay more, of the accumulated results of ages of in-
vestigation. Can any thing short of imperative necessity be
admitted as an excuse for such negligence ? Shall the candi-
date for the christian ministry be in such haste to do good that be
cannot take time to qualify himself for the work ? This looks
to us very much like an army's leaving their artillery behind
because of their haste to meet the enemy. Such a course, we
admit, may in some extraordinary cases, be justifiable. There
may be crises in which it is better to encounter the enemy with
muskets and swords, than to lose time. So we have known
cases in which it was our decided judgment that individuals
should be commissioned to preach the gospel without any
knowledge of the original languages of Scripture. But excep-
tions, be it remembered, do not constitute the rule. So far as
our experience and observation go, those young men who make
the most ado about losing time, most need to be kept back from
the sacred office until they shall have had time to qualify them-
selves for its solemn responsibilities. Nor is it strange that it
should be so, for it is an old adage that ignorance is the parent
of self-confidence.

Here we wish to say a word respecting the Latin language
as an aid to sacred literature. No part of the inspired volume
is written in this language, and, for this reason, some have
strenuously insisted upon banishing it, as a useless incumbrance
from the circle of theological studies. To this we reply that
the Latin tongue was for fifteen centuries identified with the
history and literature of the church. It is the language of that
people who, at the time of our Saviour's advent wielded the
sceptre of the civilized world ; the language of all the Western
fathers ; and, above all, the language of science, philosophy,
and literature throughout Europe from the first introduction of

1838.] Advancement ofBtkUeal KnowU^t* 71

Christkiiity till the period of the refennation^ and, to a great
exteDt, throughout the whole of that mighty coDflict of truth
with error ; and tbat^ as a necessary consequence, it embodies
vast stores of theological learning of eyery kind, and is inter-
wovea in ways innumeraUe, as well with the literature of the
Bible, as with the history of Christianity. But it may be main*
tained in opposition to this argument, that all that is valuable in
the Latin bnguage for the purposes of theological learning has
been tranafened to the English language. To this we reply
that the student who makes himself thoroughly acquiunted with
the Latin tongue and with the sacred learning which it em-
bodies, will know that the assertion is grossly incorrect. While
he is yet ignorant of the language, or only a superficial smat-
terer in it, he may be made ),o believe it, but not afterwards.
Moreover, how is the student in theology to assure himself that
the Latin tongue has thus been rifled of the accumulated treas-
ures of ages, and left an empty shell ? When he sees year
after year new and valuable translations from this into the Eng-
lish, it cannot be thought either strange or unreasonable that
be should have some misgivings on the subject, and deterauDe
to examine and judge for himsel£

It is freely conceded diat many mdividuals, without a know-
ledge eiiher of this or of any ancient language, have been emi-
nently successfy as preachers of the gospel, and that others,
well versed ia these languages, have been but feeble and ineffi««
cient ministers of the word. But the success of the former
was attributable not to their ignomnce, but to eminent ministe-
rial qualifications in other respects, which were wantbg in the
latter. Thi^re is a tendency in some minds to draw unwarrant^
able general conclusions from two or three particular facts.
They have known several instances of important enterrases
commenced on Friday which terminated disastrously. They
ascribe it to the day. Some of their neighbors who use alcohol
have robust, others who use water, feeble constitutions. They
are confident that the beverage makes all the difference.

Thec^ogical seminaries are not founded upon principles de»
duced from such narrow premises. The experience of eighteen
centuries has shown that the efficiency of Christ's ambassadors,
taken as a body, is proportioned to their piety and intelligence,
and, furthermore, that nothing but intelligence can prevent even
piety fitnn degenerating into superstition and fanaticism. The
denuod far a tboiDugUy educated nunistry has called these in-

73 Advancement of Biblical KntowUdge^ [Jak.

sthuUons into exbtence, and so long as this demand continues,
they will be sustained. Experience will undoubtedly modify
some of their provisions, but, if we rightly judge the signs of
the times, these modifications will not consist either in abridg-
ing or excluding any of the departments of theological learning
now taught m them, but rather in the introduction of more per-
fect methods of intellectual investigation and moral training.
The question, how shaU the spirit of active piety be maintained
in vigorous exercise in the bosoms of theological students during
the period of their education, so that the cultivation of their
mord feelings may Iceep pace with the development of their
intellectual faculties ? — is one of vital importance, and is
receiving, as it ought, the devout consideration of those who
are called to preside over these schools of the prophets. In
our Western seminaries the fields of activity which oQsr them-
selves to those who are in a course of training for the christian
mimstry are so many, and so accessible, that little difficulty is
experienced, so far as external arrangements are concerned.
Our young men can, if they will, find opportunities enough of
doing good which do not interfere with the vigorous prosecu-
tion of their studies. If they sufifer their christian affections to
grow torpid for want of exercise, it is their own fault. What
we have now said respecting the West will, we believe, upon
careful inquiry, be found to hold true of all parts of the Uni-
ted States. If our theological students wish for humble oppor-
tunities of usefulness, they can be found every day in all places.
From these semmaries of the church, thus perfected by ex-
perience, the most cheering results may be anticipated. We
may confidently hope that they will train up and send forth an
army of young men thoroughly furnished to the work of the
ministry, who shall know how successfully to wield the sword
of the Spirit, for the demolition of Satan's empire. The present
may be emphatically styled the monumental era of revelation.
The record of the btroduction of Christianity into thb apostate
world, of its mighty conflicts with the powers of darkness, and
of the stupendous miracles which attested its divine origin, is
now so incorporated into the history of mankind, that to effiice
it would be to blot out the annals of the world ; so inseparably
interwoven into the institutions of civilized nations, that to anni-
hilate it would be to annihilate the whole fabric of society. It
b spread out on the pages of antiquity, it is sculptured on mon-
uments, it is impressed on cobs and medals, it lifts up its

i638.] Adtaneement ofBiUiedl Knowledge. 73

▼oice from the ruins of ancient cities and empires, it lives in the
ordinances not only of the church, but of civil society, it speaks
in tones of thunder from the progressive ful61ment oi prophecy;
The mountains and vallies of Palestine, its rivers, lakes and
caves, its early and latter rain, its '^ snow and vapor and stormy
wind,'' all bear witness to the oracles of God ; and the seed of
Abraham are appointed by him to be the unwilling instruments
of attesting thehr truth in all the nations of their sojourning. It
is the duty of the christian ministry to understand and fitll in
with the grand designs of God's providence. It has pleased
him, in these " latter days," to make the evidences of our holy
religion (we speak of the external evidences^ monumental in
their character, and we must prepare to defend and advocate it
upon this basis. This species of evidence does not indeed
strike the senses so forcibly as- miracles, nor is it so readily
apprehended by the mass of the community ; but, to the candid
inquirer it is not less satisfactory. At 6»t it may appear dim
and shadowy, but, in proportion as it is scrutinized, it gathers
increasing bnghtness and lorce. It has nothing to fear from the
light of truth ; ignorance and prejudice are its only enemies.

The history of the assaults which have been made upon rev*
elation since the reformation is replete both with instruction and
consolation. It has proved itself invulnerable on every point.
Have its adversaries attempted to show that its doctrines are re-
pugnant to natural religion ? (jod has raised up some one of his
servants to demonstrate unansweraUy the analogy between
natural and revealed religion. Has philosophy, so called, held
up to ridicule its peculiar doctrines as absurd and self contradic*
tory ? A deeper philosophy has convicted it of uttering that
which it unaerstoo4 not, things too wonderful for it, which it
knew not. Have the genuineness and authenticity of the sacred
canon been assailed ? The result has been to establish both upon
an immovable basis. Has the future fulfilment of some one of the
predictions of revelation been sneered at as a physical impossi-
bility? Even infidels, upon considerations independent* of
Scripture, have been led to presage the same event. Who, for
example, with the knowledge which we now possess of the
structure and constitution of the earth, will venture to sneer at
the idea of a literal conflagration which shall envelop her, as
m the twinkling of an eye, from pole to pole, destroying eveiy
vestige of her present organization ? Such has been the re-
sult of past effiirts to shake the foundations of Christianity, and

Vol. XI. No. 29. 10

74 On the Naiwe ofhutiinct. [Jan.

such will be the result of future effi>rts. Meanwhile, as the
process of investigation has been going on, one after another of
tbe mists of error that had settled dpwn up<Mi her during the
long night of the dark ages, has been dissipated, and she made
to shine in a clearer and more resplendent light.

It has hitherto been Jehovah's plan to bring in at certain
eras an overwhelming flood of light and truth to dazzle and con-
found his enemies. Such were the eras of the introduction of
the Mosaic and of the christian dispensations ; each of them
bursting upon the world in all its brightness and glory at a
period when the church was sunk into a state of the deepest
depression. May we not hope that another such era began
with the reformation and is steadily advancing towards the perfect
day ? an era not characterized, like the two former, by a series
of stupendous interpositions of miraculous power, but by an
irrepressible spirit of inquiry and research ; a spirit which shall
press every department of knowledge to its utmost boundaries ;
and which, when sanctified by the Spirit of God, and directed
to the investigation of divine truth, shall under his guidance,
separate from it the leaven of superstition and false philosophy,
thus restoring it to its pristine sweetness and purity ; and shall
shed around the sacred volume such a lustre of evidence as
shall sear the eye-balls of skepticism and mfidelity, and drive
them back to the bottomless pit whence they first ascended,
leaving the everlasting gospel to the undisputed supremacy of
Che ransomed family of Adam.

ARTICLE V.

On the Nature of Instinct.

By Samael FUh, M. O* BmUhi.

Instinct is a subject upon which a great deal has been said
and written, and still we know so litde what it is and upon what
principles it operates, that we are scarcely wiser than we should
be if it had never been discussed. While some have consider-
ed it a mere impulse exerted upon animals without their being
conscious of it, others have exalted it to an equality with rea-

1888.] On the Nature cfhstinct. 75

son-^-considered it reason— 4>ut reason of a lower grade than
that whiqh distinguishes the human species of a proper age from
mere brute animals, - It has generally been defined to be the
power which determines the will of brutes ; or a desire or aver-
sion acting io the mind without the interventioa of reason or de-
liberation. While instinct has been considered a power which
has been exerted without reflectioui and as belonging mostly to
brutes^ reason has been considered the power by which we de-
duce one proposition from another, and as confined altogether
to the human species. Brutes, by most philosophers, have been
considered as actuated by nothing but instinct, and even the
human species as actuated by no other principle in their infan-
tile state.

Descartes and others after him, supposed that brutes were
mere mechanical machines, having neither ideas nor sensation ;
pleasure nor pain; and that their cries and moanings under
punishment, and adversity, when moved by an opposite im-
pulse, are produced by the same sort of force, which when
exerted upon the keys of an organ compels its respective pipes
to give forth different sounds. Dr. Reid of modem times has
espoused the doctrine of a mechanical principle, but differs from
Descartes b supposing that the actions which are resolvable in-
to this principle are of two kinds, those of instinct and those of
habit.

Smellieand Dr. Darwin are inexact opposition to. a mechan-
ical force — to a corporeal hypothesis. They contend that in-
stinct is a mental principle, and that brutes possess an intelligent
feculty of the same nature, though more limited in its extent, than
that of our own species. They are agreed in supposing that in-
stinct is a mental efibrt, and therefore a faculty of reason , but differ
by the former supposing that reason is the result of instinct, and
the latter that instinct is the result of reason. Darwin recites
many instances, with how much propriety those who read may
judge, to show that the facultv which has been denominated in-
stinct is in reality reason. An idea of his opinion, in general,
may be inferred from the two following extracts from his
Zoonomy. ^^ By a due attentibn to these circumstances, many
of the actions, which at first sight seemed only referable to an
inexplicable instinct, will appear to have been acquired, like all
other animal actions that are attended with consciousness, by re-
peated effbrts of our muscles under the conduct of our sensations
and desires." ^' If it should be asked what induces a bird to

76 On the Nature ofhutinct. [Jan.

sit weeks on its first eggs unconscious that a brood of young
ones will be the product ? The answer will be that, it is the
same passion that induces the human mother to hold her off-
spring whole nights and days in her arms, and press it to her
bosom, unconscious of its future growth to sense and manhood,
till observation or tradition have informed her."

Another set of philosophers have contended that instincts are
of a mixed kind, holding an intermediate station between mat-
ter and mind ; or that in some instances they are simply ma-
terial, and in others simply mental. Cudworth, at the head of
one division of these, from an attachment to the Platonic theory
of the creation, an important principle of which is, that '^ incor-
poreal form," or " an active and plastic nature," exists through-
oat its wide domain, independendy of pure mind and pure mat-
ter, supposed that instinct might be resolved into the operation
of this secondary energy, in proportion to its existence in the
universe. M. Buffon at the head of the second division of this
class, not wiUmg to accede altogether to the mechanical theory
of Descartes, or to aUot to animals below the rank of man the
possession of an intelligent principle, permitted them to be pos-
sessed of the principle of life, and allowed them the feculty of dis-
tmguishing between pleasure and pain, with the possession of a
desire for the former and an aversion for the latter. M. Rei-
men, a German professor, differing in some measure from this
theory ; divides the actions which he believes ought to pass
under the name of instinct into three classes, mechanical, rep-
resentative and spontaneous. Mechanical, be considers those
actions of animal organs over which the will has no control,
as the pulsations of the heart, the secretion of the bile, pancrea-
tic juice, etc., and the dilatation of the pupil of the eye ; repre-
sentative, those which depend upon an imperfect memory, of
which brutes are allowed to share in some small degree ; and
spontaneous, those which originate from M. Buffon's admitted
mculty of distinguishing (in the brute creation^ pleasure from
pain, and the desire resulting from thb distinguishing propensi^
of possessing the one and being freed from the other.

The great Cuvier supposes that instinct consists of ideas which
do not originate from sensation, but which flow immediately
from the brain and which are truly innate. ^' The understand-
iogi" says he '^ may have ideas without the aid of the senses ;
two thirds of the brute creation are moved by ideas which they
do not owe to their sensations, but which flow immediately

1888.] Oti the Nahart of BuHnct. 77

fifom the hrain. Instinct (xxistitutes this order of phenomena ;
it is composed of ideas truly innate, in which the senses have
never had the smallest share."

A person who has attended to all these theories, and to all
which has ever been written or said upon the subject, is but little
wiser than when he commenced his investigations. ' Some of
them, even those of men of great eminence in other respects,
are too absurd not to be considered so by men of ordinary abil-
ities. The most inconsistent theories are those which consid*
er animals in the scale of beings next below man, to be mere
machines, and to be moved by a mere mechanical impulse.
Several other theories which have been mentioned are made up
of a collection of inconsistencies, and unintelligible absurdities ;
and a person attains no knowledge from attending to them.
To obviate all the difficulty, and to give place to a theory upon
a more rational hypothesis, M. Dupont of Nemours, France,
in an article read before the National Institute, proposes to drop
the term altogether, and fiirther insists that there is no such
thing as instinct ; and that every action which has been referred
to such a Acuity, originates from intelligence, thought, exam-
ple, or from the association of ideas. This, it will be perceived,
18 a revival m a new form, of the theory of Smellie and Darwin.

Dr. Ghx)d, in his Book of Nature, which we have called
considerably to our aid, after taking a general survey of the opin-
ions and theories of other philosophers, comes to the conclusion
that the principle of instinct never has been explicitly pointed
out. After a few preliminary observations, he proposes to ex-
hibit a new view, or a new theory upon the subject. He directs
the attention to inorganic matter, which he has previously ex-
tensively spoken of; particularly to some of the more promi-
nent characters by which this is distinguished from organic mat-
ter, as a stone from a plant or an animal. The stone, he savs,
was produced fortuitously, formed by external accretion, and is
only destructible by mechanical or chemical agencies. The
plant, he observes, is produced by generation, brought forward
m its growth by nutrition and by internal accretion, and render-
ed destructible by death. Animals difier from plants in a num-
ber of respects, but they are both characterized by a property
which be terms the principle of life. *^ Liife," says he, ^' or
this mysterious or fogitive essence is a distinct principle from
that of thought, and from that of sensation. Mr. John Hunter
has traced it to many of the organized fluids as yfeW as the

78 On the Nature ofhMinct. [Jan.

solids^ especially to the blood. In every organized system,
whether animal or vegetable^ and in every part of such system ,
whether solid or fluid, may be traced that power, which with
such propriety may be denominated the principle of life. Of
its cause and nature we know no more than we know of the
cause and nature of magnetism. It b neither essential nund,
nor essential matter; it is neither passion nor sensation ; though
it is distinct from all these, it is capable of combining with
any of them. It is possessed of its own book of laws, to which,
under the same circumstances, it adheres without the smallest
deviation.

The agency by which it operates, he says, is what should be
denominated instinct, and its actions, when its sole and uniform
aim is accomplished, instinctive actions. Instinct, whenever
manifesdy directing its operations to the health, preservation
and reproduction of the living frame, or any part of the living
frame, is the operation of the lining principle. It is that pow-
er which characterizes and distinguishes organized from unor-
ganized matter — ^pervades and regulates the former as gravita-
tion pervades the latter, uniformly operating by definitive means
in definitive circumstances, to the general welfare of the individ-
ual system on its separate organs ; advances them to perfection,
preserves them in it, or lays the foundation for their reproduc-
tion as the case may be.

It applies, according to the same theorist, equaUy to plants
and to animals, and to every part of the plant and to every part
of the animal, as long as the principle of life continues in them.
It maintains from age to age the distinctive characters of plants
and animals, carries ofiT the waste or worn out matter, and sup-
splies new — very often suggests the mode of cure when diseases
and injuries have occurred or been inflicted, and even effects the
cure itself. ^' It is,'' continues he, ^' the divinity that stirs within
us, and is the much noted * vis medicatrix naturae,' of so many
noted physicians."

This is giving it an application so much more extensive than
we have been accustomed to think it entitied to and as applied
to it, and is linking and classifying actions together, so widely
deviating from each other, especially m appearance, that we can
with difficulty, even when we can conceive of notiibg more
plausible, persuade ourselves to aflbrd it our assent. Instinct
has generally, if we have not entertained wrong conceptions,
been supposed to comprehend those actions only, which teemed

1838.] On the nature of hutinct* 79

to arise, whether in the new bom infimt or in brute animab,
from a voluntary motion. Su^b are the acts of the infant, when
from some cause or other, it seeks nutriment from its. mother's
breast ; such are the acts of all the mammiferous animals in tbe
same circumstances, the seeming anxiety of these to take care and
preserve their young, with a great many other similar acts ; such
are the actions of the feathered tribes to sit for weeks upon their
eggs until they are hatched, and then to feed and brood over
them until they are capable of taking care of themselves ; and
such are a thousand acts of a similar kind in other animals, which
it is unnecessary in this place to particularize.

With proper deference to a character so esteemed as a phy-
^cian, so much admired as a professor, and so noted as an author,
I shall venture to deviate from the above mentioned theorist,
and prescribe narrower limits to the actions of instinct, and in
some respects ascribe thexn to different faculties than those to
which they have been usually considered as belonging.

To impart clear views, I shall follow still further the theory
of Dr. Good, and afterwards commence the examination of the
one just mentioned. At the conclusion of the first lecture of
Dr. Good, he says that " bstinct may be defined the operation
of the principle of organized life by the exercise of certain natural
powers directed to the present or future good of the individual ;
and reason the operation of the principle of intellectual life,
by the exercise oi certain acquired powers directed to the same
end.'' Towards the commencement of his other lecture, be
says, ''Instinct is the common law or praperty of organized
matter, as gravitation is of unorganized ; and the former bears
the same analogy to sensation and perception that the latter
does to crystalization and chemical affinity. Instinct is the gen-
eral faculty of the organized mass as gravitation is of the unpr-
ganized mass ; sensation and perception are peculiar powers or
fiiculties appertaining to the second ; they can only exist under
certain circumstances of the organized or unorganized matter to
which they respectively belong. Gravitation belongs equally to
the smallest portions of unorganized matter ; instinct in like
manner belongs equally to the smallest portions of organized
matter; it exists alike in solids and fluids ; m the whole firame,
and in every part of the firame ; in every organ and in every
part of every organ, so long as the principle of life continues. '

There might be some beauty, at least, and some propriety in
such a theory, if the mind bad not restricted it to narrower limits.

80 On the NatuH ofiuiinct. 1838.]

As the case is, it seems like breaking over barriers which nature
had designed not to have broken over ; or like invading a coun-
try with a powerful force, when we had no right, or just cause.
In the present essay, all those acti<Hi8 or motions which are per-
formed without our being conscious of them, and which have been
called involuntary motions, such as the action of the Hbart and
arteries, the motion of the stomach and bowels, the secretion of
the various fluids, the contraction and dilatation of the pupil of
the eye, and many others of a like kind, will be left out of the
catalogue of instinctive motions. The whole vegetable class of
organized bodies, of course will be left out. This, it is believed,
might with much more propriety, be arranged under some other
name. There seems to be no better way of classing what are
herein considered to be instinctive actions, than by taking those
whk^h in brute animals and in the new bom infant seem to be
performed, to a greater or less degree, through the intervention
of the will. In respect to the former, there is no necessity of
any further particularizing, and in regard to the latter, those
acts onlv are thought of, which in after life, as far as they ap-
ply to the human species, are universally allowed to be per-
formed through the mtervention of the will, add as fiu: as they
apply to the brute creation, to what trppears to be the will.

Smellieand Darwin, as before stated, have mtroduced a theory,
in which they strangely contend, that brute animals and infants
are actuated by the faculty of reasoning. This we shall not
discuss very particularly. We shall not contend for it to any
great extent, and we shall not exclude it altogether, considering
it in every respect indefensible. Some of the actions, which
we shall consider as belonging to instinct, are performed with-
out reflection and without much seeming connection with it,
and some through the intervention of what, if it is not reason,
appears to be allied to reason. All instinctive motions call
into action those muscles which are ordinarily considered to be
under the control of the will.

Though instinctive actions — those considered such by Dr.
Good, according to the limits above defined, have been con-
siderably reduced, yet a number remain, and they consist of
several kinds. In the account now to be given by them, we
will begin with those which first present themselves in the new
bom infant, and other mammiferous animals. The first of any
impk>rtance which here presents itself, is a nestling upon its
mother's breast. This, it will be here observed, is not pioduc-

J8S8.] On the Naiure of tittmct. 81

ced by a mere mechanical impulse, like what might be produced
upoD dead, inorganic, or disorganized matter, but from an im-
pulse originating from proper and natural feelings— ^sensations
and desires-— such as present themselves, as well among brutes
as hiunan creatures, though with less acuteness in both, in
after life. From a sense of hunger and inanition, in which
there can be no mistake, derires are created after nourishment
which occasion an uneasiness and nestling, and from a sense of
smell, which from its never having been blunted or contamina-
ted by obtuse and unnatural objects, i» perhaps more acute
than in subsequent life, its proper place, to a greater or less de-
gree, is pointed out, and the infiint, or the young of brutes is
satisfied. A person who seriously and rationally takes this m*
lo coosideratjoo, can no more believe that it is performed with-
out consciousness, than that at a later period of his existence
he cannot tell what hunger, and agreeable and disagreeable
odors are.

As age advances, there is a propensity with the child to laugh
and play, and with the colt, the calf, the lamb to gambol and
jump, which are healthful actions, and excited by a desire for
exercise. If health prevails there is a glow of pleasurable sen-
sations experienced, and an impulse occasicmed by these, calcu-
lated to put in motion some of the various muscles provided for
such purposes.

When the young are old enough, a different kind of food
from that of the mother's milk is required, and the young of all
animals, from natural desires, or from seeing others feed, or
from both, partake of it themselves. New propensities and
new desires develop and present themselves as age advances,
and hence we see new intimacies forming, new joys and new
pleasures experienced, and new engagements and new connec-
tions entered into. A new connection between the sexes takes
place, but not without a peculiar sensation which directs to it,
and an assurance that new pleasures will result from it. There
is nothing inexplicable or wonderful in tbb, nothing but what
we can readily account for, that is considering ourselves such
beings as we are, and the mystery, that others have considered
as belonging to instinctive actions, vanishes the moment they
are taken up in their proper light. We know what our own
feelings are in regard to these things, and we have no reason
to suppose from what we every day behold, that there is any
essential difference between our own feelings in these respects,

Vol. XI. No. 29. 11

82 On the Nature of Butind. [Jan*

and those of brutes. We behold the latter provided with the
senses of seeing, hearing, tasting, smelling, feeling, just like our-
selves ; we see them actuated by hunger and thirst, as we are ;
provided with organs of reproduction, and apparently actuated
by the same feelings in regard to the propensides belonging to
these. They are possessed of a brain, a spinal chord, nerves
originating from these and extending to the respective senses,
and to all the different muscles. Why should they not be sub-
ject to pleasure and pain, desires and aversions, affections and
antipathies like ourselves ? Why is there any thing more inex-
plicable and indefinable in things of a like nature, whether they
belong to brutes or to ourselves ?

There seem to be feelings of pity, love, compassion, fear,
and many other passions, belonging to brutes ; and why should
it be otherwise ? They are endowed with AeA and blood,
^TJthe and appear to be in agony when a wound is inflicted,
grow lean when under the influence of disease and when food is
withheld, and thrive and look plump when under opposite cir-
cumstances. We see them operated upon by anger, rage,
hatred and revenge, as well as by the milder passions. If they
are endowed with the same senses, the same desires and aver-
sions, the same propensities and passions that man is, they are
probably moved by the same impulses, all of which lead to
similar results to what they do in ourselves, only in different de-
grees. In all these comparisons, the infant of our own spe-
cies should be reckoned with brutes, because instinct has been
supposed to apply to him much in the same way as to animab
of the brute creation.

There are different actions in different orders, genera and
species of brute animals, the peculiarities of which require par-
ticular notice. The dog barks, the cat mews, the lion roars,
the horse neighs, which peculiarities are accounted for, upon
the principle, that there is a peculiarity in their respective vocal
organs, and in the muscles belonging to the respective brute an-
imals which from the proper impulse are excited into action.
We know not exactly what the feeling is that causes the dog to
bark, but when we pay attention to the incidents that seem to
be the cause of it, and to the peculiar sort of excitement that
the animal at such a time exhibits, we can be at but little loss
about it. It is not hunger that produces it ; it is not fear ex-
acdy ; it is not the same feeling that causes the fox to burrow,
the rabbit to hide itself in the thicket, and the bird to fly to its

1888*] On the Nature of tutinct. 83

perch upoa the tree. It is probably a difibrent feeliDg fixMn
what any other animal experiences, but it may be stmilar to
that which causes the ass to bray, or the hen to cackle. There
is an excitement occasioned peculiar to that species of animals,
and that excitement produces the efhn that produces the note
wluch we call a bark. If it was a cat, even supposing the sen-
sation and the impulse were the same, the note or the tone of
voice would be different, because the confonnation of the par-
ticular apparatus is difl^rent. By alternately pressing upon the
re^on of the lungs and desbting from pressure in a dead
crow, the same hoarse note is produced, which it is accustomed
to utter when alive. So that it is not the peculiarity of instinct
and peculiarity of impulse, that produces the peculiarity of
sound, but the particular conformation of the vocal organs.

The various feathered tribes, after having deposited their eggs
in some convenient place, or in a nest formed with so much
skill that the most finbhed artist of the human species cannot
equal it, sit days and weeks without the smallest weariness or
seeming impatience. Here is as complete a specimen of in-
stinctive action as could be exhibited, and one which the disci-
ples of Descartes would be as likely to consider mechanical as
any of that class of actions. What but an unknown and inex-
plicable impulse, it may be asked, can induce these creatures to
sit so long, when it is so unlikely, especially in the first instance,
what the result will be ? In regard to this being altogether un-
known to them, there is some doubt. In regard to the reply
to such a c[uestion, I can state without much hesitancy, that it
is probably a similar impulse to that which induces the fond
mother to watch over her infimt babe and undergo so much so-
licitude for its wel&re. From what has been stated, and from
what is every d^y seen, it is evident that the brute creation are
operated upon by passion — ^by love, fear, hatred, compassion,
and many others of which we know ourselves to be possessed.
Though there is nothing in the human species that exactly cor-
responds with the propensity or passion of the feathered tribes
to sit whole weeks upon their eggs, yet there are propensities
which are like it, and which might be readily perceived to be
like it were we to pay scrupulous attention to the various affec-
tions belongmg to the human race. It is no more strange that
there should be such an affection in these animals, than that
there should be love, love of offipring, m our own race. A
person) after beholding with how much tenacity the hen sits

84 On the Nature oflmtkM. [Jan.

upon her eggs, must have but very little sagacity not to per^
ceive that it is a passion, and a passion not altogether unlike
what may be discovered in animals of a dilB^rent order, and
even among that order of which he is an individual member.
We can more readily convince ourselves that it is a passion,
than we can convince ourselves that it is reason, or altc^ether
reason, for though the animal is so very solicitous to con*-
tinue upon her nest, yet she knows not whetlier it is her
own eggs she is sitting upon or those of a different species of
the feathered race. Although she knows not, or appears to
know not that it is her own eggs she is sitting upon^ it argues
not that she is altogether unconscious of what the result wiU be
— unconscious that there will be a brood of young birds when
she has set long enough. One thing more will be mentioned
in regard to this, and that is, that though she appears not to
have reason, she may in a slight degree be possessed of it, but
from the ardor of the passion which induces her to be attached
to her nest, reason is overpowered and drowned, as sometimes
happens with individuals of the human race, when their anger
gets the mastery. Cases are known, where the ardor of the
hen has not perhaps, arrived to its full height, in which, to
change her eggs would cause her to forsake her nest.

It has been stated that there are several kinds of instinctive ac-
tion. Those which present themselves in the young of mam-
nuferous animals, as observed when they are nestling for their
mother's milk, are one kind. Those of which we have just
been speaking are another, and there are others still to be men-
tioned. The first are those which more immediately arise from
sensation, the others irom passion, and there are still others
which may be supposed to originate from habit, or partly habit
and partly passion. Ducks and geese have a strong propensity
to swim upon the water, and that the propensity originates part-
ly from habit may be inferred from the circumstance that they
can be deprived of this indulgence without apparent detriment.
It is passion, or a species of it, that actuates the dog to fly at
and to hunt other animals. A similar propensity causes other
animals, though ever so able to defend themselves, to flee
from, or wish not to encounter the dog. It is passion, if it is
not sensation, that influences the cat to watch for and catch
mk)e and other pestiferous animals. One species of animals are
actuated by one sort of impulse, and another species by another.
It is natural for the hawk to watch for smaller birds> the fox to

1838.] Onthe Natwre of Butinct. 85

watch for poultry, the wolf for sheep, etc. It is natural for
some birds to migrate, for some to burrow and for some to swim
upon the water. Sensation, passion, habit ; sometimes one,
sometimes more, or the whole are the cause.

Besides these, there is another kind of instinct, if it is instinct,
which is allied to reason, if it is not reason, when a horse upon
coming where two or more roads centre, almost invariaUy
takes that which will bring him to hb home the quickest, the ex-
istence of a greater or less degree of reason must be supposed
to actuate the animal. If a dog untold strives to protect a child
fiom the danger which threatens it, it carries the idea that this
creature has a portion of that foculty which is called reason^
When a fox crosses and recrosses its track in order to puzzle
the dog which is in pursuit of it, it shows that it has something
of that ingredient which were it in man would be called reason.
I have known a hcwse, when leading him, stop as suddenly for
me to replace my portmanteau which had fallen from it, as
though it had been man. I have known a dog, when a person
had been making preparation to kill him, act as shy and en-
deavor to keep itself out of the way, almost as much as though
it had been man. 1 have known a fox, while crossing a pond
upon the ice, after coming to a weak place, feel as carefully as
a person would feel if he were examining it, and instead of
stepping upon it as it had done before, lie down and roll, to
avoid breaking through. A thousand such things might be
mentioned to show that brutes, if they have not reason, have
something so nearly allied to it, that it scarcely deserves a sep-
arate name. The wisdom of the bee to construct its curiously-
wrought checker-woik for a depository for its honey, appears
like reason, and it is probably reason combined with that par-
ticukar propensity wUch causes the hen to sit whole weeks widi
the prospect in view of at a proper time beholding its infant
progeny. The elephant, the beaver, the ant and many other
creatures, are possessed of what, if it were beheld in the hu-
man species, would be called reason. That it is reason we will
not pretend to decide, but should be glad to know in what re-
spect it differs irom reason. Some of the more unusual phe-
nomena of instinctive action ought perhaps to be mentioned,
but we know of none but what would come under one of the
four heads of instinctive impulse which have been noticed.
There is a species of animals which at a particular period coUoct
in vast bodies, and after making all needful pvspamtion soortfHr

86 Dr. Sckmudeer*8 Appeal. [Jan.

a given point, and whatever the impediments may be, continue the
same course without turning to the right or to the left, until they
arrive at the place of their destination or perish in tlie attempt.
This, from being uncommon, may appear inegular and perhaps
to some inexplicable, but if due inquiries were made about it, it
would doubtless meet with an easy explanation. We have
not yet learned all the attributes of the animal world. There
are animals that have less senses than man, and there may
be those that have more. If we knew what these were,
we should not perhaps ascribe so much mystery to instinct —
should not exhibit it in such a light as to confound the wisdom
of the wise. More might be said upon this subject, and more
probably ought to be said, to evolve our theory from the mists
which encompass it, but as a denser mist might place itself in its
stead, we shidl leave it where it is, hopmg that if any light has
been elicited, abler pens will be induced to continue the subject
and disencumber it from every thing that b mysterious.

ARTICLE VI.

Fraternal Appeal to the American Churches, togeth-
er WITH A Plan for Catholic Union on Apostolic
Principles.*

By B. B. Scbmaeknr, D. D., ^olbnor of mdiotie tad Polemic Theology in the Theol.
Bern, of Gen. Synod of Uie LnUieran church, Gettyiborg, A.

WTW &, nM^iiq ^futg* — Jkbus.
j^ KvgMq^ fUa nUniQj er fianturfuu — Paul,

When the sincere and unsophisticated Christian contemplates
the image of the church as delineated both in its theory and

* It is proper to inform the readers, that the whole of the follow-
ing article, and the substance of that which (ProvideDce permitting)
will appear in the April number of the Repository, and will exhibit
the details of the Plan of Union were written about a year ago, and there-
fore prior to the eicision of a portion of the Presbyterian church by the
iast General Aflsembly^ This obserration may be neceamy to prevent

1838.] Dr. Sdmueker^i Appeal 8T

practice by the Saviour and his apostles, be is charmed by the-
deligbtfiil spirit of unity and brotherly love by which it is char-
acterized. When he hears the beloved disciple declare ^^ God
is love, and they that dwell in love dwell in God :" and agab^
^* Beloved, let us love one another, for love is of God, and
every one that loveth is bom of Grod, and knoweth God. He
that loveth not, knoweth not Grod ; for God is love :'' and
again, ** Beloved, if God so loved us, we ought also to love one
another — ^If any man say I love God, and hateth his brother,
he is a liar ; for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath
seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen ? And tins
commandment have we from him, that he who loveth God, love
his brother also." — When the Christian listens to such declara-
tions as these, and numerous others of similar import ; when
forgetting things as they exist around him, he brings his whole
soul under the influence of this love to God and the brethren ;
be perceives the moral beauty of these sentiments, and finds
his heart vibrate m delightful unison with them. But when
he awakes from this fascinating dream and beholds the body
of Christ rent into difierent divisions, separately organized, pro-
fessing difierent creeds, denouncing each other as in error, and
often times, hating and being bated ; his spirit is grieved within
him, and he asks how can these things be among brethren ? In
the sacred record he looks in vain for the sectarian parties wluch

the miaapprehensioD of some remarks, which might otherwise nat-
urally be regarded as allustons to more recent events.

As a disciple of the common Saviour, the writer feels a sincere
desire for the prosperity of every protestant frindameDtally orthodox
denomination, and for another ** blessed Reformation" in the entire-
Romish church itself. As such, he feels it his privilege and duty to-
address a few ideas to his Protestant brethren generally, on the re-
lations which do or ought to subsist between the different portions--
of Christ's kingdom. And he would respectfully and affectionately
request them to test the sentiments advanced, not by their ecclesiastical
standards, which are the work of uninspired though good men, but by
the ^ law and the testimony," by the inspired rule of God's holy word..
Let them solemnly inquire whether the Protestant churches organ-
ized and operating on the principles, fully developed in the next Num-
ber, would not approximate much nearer to the apostolic church, than*
they now do ; whether they could not act much more efficiently and
harmoniously in advancing the triumphs of the cross in the heathoD
and the papal world ; and whether we might not even hope again to
the days, when surrounding observers will exclaim : ^ See how thi
k>ve one another ?"

88 Dr. Schnrndcer^i j^peaL [Jam.

DOW constitute all that is seen of the cbuich of the Redeemer;
be finds nothing there of Lutherans, of Presby terians, of Metho*
dbts, of Episcopalians, of Baptists. But be sees that when the
formation of such parties was attempted at Corinth, Paul
deemed it necessary to write them a long letter, and besought
them by the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, to have no divis-
ions among them. The Christian is therefore constrained to
mourn over the desolations of Zion and to meet the solemn in-

Juiry, cannot a balm be found hr the ulcerous divisions which
eface the body of Christ ?

Many such hearts there happily are at the present day,
which are relentmg from the rigor of party organization and
sectarian asperity. The love of Chnst, that sacred flame
which warms them, and bids them strive together for the con-
version of a world, also melts down the walls of partition, which
might well enough keep Jews asunder from Gentiles, but was
never permitted to sever one Jew from another, and much less
ought now to separate a Christian from hb brodier. Many are
pondering these things in their hearts, and asking ought breth-
ren to be thus estranged ? ought Ephraim thus to envy Judah,
and Judah to vex Ephraim ? Their number too is multiplying.
Brotherly love and christian liberality are on the whole progres-
sive, and tender increasing facilities, — whilst they urge the im-
perious obligation of this inquiry upon every enlightened and
sanctified intellect. Happily many of the ablest heads and noblest
hearts in Christendom feel called to review the grtmndy which
the Protestant churches have been led to assvme partly by op^
tion^ partly by inconsideration, and partly by the coercion of
circumstances. The successful prosecution of this inquiry de-
mands the casting off of the prejudices of education and long
established habits, a recurrence to the elementary principles of
Christianity, of christian doctrine, of christian government, of
christian duty : and the men, be they ministers or be they lay-
men, who would regard this subject with indifference, or d»-
miss it with a sneer, minr well inquire whether the love of
Christ dwells in them, in this great concern not self-interest,
but the interest of the Redeemer's kingdom, should be the mo-
tive of our actions ; not victory, but truth should be our aim.

In this incipient stage of our discussion, we would premise a
few principles, or draw a few lines, by which the general course
of our investigation may be recognized and the results in some
degree be anticipated at which we shall arrive. It is admitted,

1838.] Dr. Schmueker^M Appeal 89

a) As one bouse cannot contain all the Christians in the world,
or in a particular country, there must necessarily be different
houses of worship.

b) As all Chiistians in a particular country cannot be incor-
porated into one congregation to enjoy the ordinances of .the
gospel, and to execute the duties of mutual edification, super-
vision and discipline ; there must be different congregations , as
there were in the days of the apostles ; whatever may be the
proper principle for their construction, and the proper bond for
their union with each other.

c) We premise as a point conceded, that all the several de-
nominations tenned orthodox, which are but clusters of such
difierent congregations, are parts of the true visible church
of Christ; because, in the conscientious judgment of all enlight-
ened Christians, they hold the essentials of the gospel scheme of
faith and practice ; and secondly, because the Saviour himself
has acknowledged them as such by the seal of his grace and
Spirit. ^' When James, Cephas and John perceived the grace
thai was given to me" says Paul, to the Galatians,* ^* they gave
to me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship." And where
is the bigot, who at the present day, would claim his to be the
only true church, and thus repudiate all others as synagogues of
Satan?

d) As these denominations hold dissentient views on some
nonessential points, it is demonstrable that all except one of
them must entertain some error. For of two contrary opinions
only one can be true. But the pretension that any one sect is
right in all things, and all others m error so far as they diverge
from th'is one, is highly improbable in itself, is forbidden by
chrisdan humility, by a knowledge of human nature, and by the
amount of talent, learning and piety in all the several churches.
Hence some error, in all probability, is an attribute of each
sect.

e) Finally, we premise that ministers and laymen, though
pious, are fallible, are sanctified but in part and liable to temp-
tation from secular motives and feelings, even in things per-
taining to the Redeemer's kingdom. Hence they are all un-
der obligation to review their course of thought and action,
and ought to be willing, for the glory of their God and Saviour,
to retrace and amend whatever may be found amiss. This ob-

• Chap. {2: 9.

Vol. XI. No. 29. 12

90 Dr. Schmucker's Appeal. [Jak.

ligation devolves alike upon the writer and the reader. With a
deep impression of its importance, its claims are urged on your
present attention.

Under the presumption therefore that in these diversities of
opinion we are all more or less in error, let us inquire whether it is
right that the body of Christ should on account of these diver-
sities be rent into so many different parts, under circumstances
creating different interests in each, and strongly tending to alien-
ate their affections, and dissolve that bond of fraternal love, by
which they should be united, or whether it is the duty of Chris-
tians to endeavor to heal these divisions, and promote unity
among all whom they profess to regard as disciples of Christ.
The will of our divine Master will become apparent to us
whilst we successively consider,

I. The Scriptural injunctions.

IL The example of the apostles and primitive Christians.

III. The consequences which these divisions produce.

In the wealthy and corrupt city of Corinth, a christian church
nad been planted by Paul, watered by the eloquent ApoUos,
and blessed by him, from whom alone can come any genuine
increase. In this church, it seems, there appeared symptoms
of the spirit of sectarianism, that spirit, ^^ which now worketh"
not only '^ among the children of disobedience," who have a
name to live whilst they are dead ;" but which often mars the en-
joyment and tarnishes the graces of the members of Christ's spirit-
ual body. The Corinthian brethren had long been familiar with
the several sects of heathen philosophers and religionists and by a
natural transition were led to array themselves into parties accord-
ing to some religious differences which arose among them. Some
said '' I am of Paul," probably because he first laid the foundation
of the Corinthian church ;* others said " I am of Apollos," per*
haps on account of his superior eloquence ; and others said '' I
am of Cephas," either because like Peter, they cherished Jew-
ish predilections, or were converted by him elsewhere. Here
then was an attempt to introduce different sects or religious de*
nominations into the church of Christ, ranged under different
leaders such as Paul, ApoUos, Peter, Luther, Calvin, Zuingli
or Wesley ; and what are the feelings of the noble-minded
Paul ? Does he approve of such a course ? Let us hear his
own words, my brethren, and pray that the spirit of our lacerated

• Chap. 3:10. Acts 18: II.

1888.] Dr. Sehmucker^s Appeal. 91

Master may enable us to understand them. ^^ I beseech you,
bretbreoy by the Lord Jesus Christ," (by the hope you cherish
through him, by his suffering, by his blood), I beseech you,
''that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no schisms
{oxiofAuta) or sects among you ; but that ye be joined together
in the same mind and in the same judgment. For it bath been
declared to me concerning you, my brethren, by them which
are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions (epidsg)
among you : namely that every one of you saitb," either " I am of
Paul" (he is my leader), " or I am of Apollos, or I am of Peter,
or I am of Christ. Is Christ," (i. e. the body of Christ) " di-
vided ? Was Paul" (or either of those whose names ye assume
and whom ye wish to place at tlie side of Christ as leaders or
heads of the church) " crucified for you ? Or were ye baptized
into the name of Paul (or of Apollos, or of Peter, so that ye
were received into their church, and not into the church of
Christ 1) "I thank God," (since ye thus abuse the privi-
lege of having been baptized) '' that I baptized none of you except
Crispus" (the ruler of the synagogue) " and Gaius" (whose hos-
pitality I enjoyed whilst at Corinth ;) so that ye cannot with
any semblance of truth allege, that I baptized you in my own
name and thus formed a peculiar sect of Christians.

Such is the powerful and decided testimony given by the in-
spired apostle Paul, against the spirit of sectarianism. Ought
not every man who believes himself a Christian, to feel the force
of this rebuke and ask. Lord, what wilt thou have me to do to
heal thy wounded body ? The apostle does not ev<en introduce
into his argument the points of diversity among them, on ac^
count of which they were arraying themselves into different
parties. The simple facts that they were baptized into Christ,
and into Christ alone, i. e. were members of the church in good
standing, and that Christ must not be divided, are the only argu-
ments whk^h he deems requisite to prove the impropriety of their
divisions and of their assumption of different names. He would
have them Christians and nothing but Christians ; not Pauline
Christians, nor Apollme, nor Cephine, nor Lutheran, nor Calvinis-
tb, nor Wesleyan Christians, not because he had any antipathy to
Apollos or Peter; but because any such divisions based on dif-
ference of opinions or personal attachments naturally tended to.
rend asunder the body of Christ. Let it be distinctly remem-
bered then, that the argument of Paul for the unity of the Re-
deemer's visible church is twofold ; first, he maintains that this

92 Dr. Sdimucker'i Appeal. 1888.]

uDity and the impropriety of divisions on party-grounds are evi-
dently presupposed by the fact, that all its members are baptized
into the name of Christ alone ; and secondly from the fact that all
divisions based on difference, are equivalent to dividing the one
body of Chrbt. Nor does he here affix any limitations to these
principles, and no uninspired authority is competent to prescribe
any others than such as may indubitably flow from other inspired
declarations or from the obvious nature of Christianity itself.
The apostle Paul therefore distinctly forbids the cutting up of
those whom he would acknowledge as Christians at all, into dif-
ferent parties or sects. And this he does even by anticipation,
for in all probability, these paities had not yet fully separated
from one another, nor renounced ecclesiastical inter-communion.
Yet there were in the apostolic age, as well as at present, men
who claimed to be Christians, but whom this great apostle
was unwilling to acknowledge as such, and commanded ^' after
the first and second admonition, to reject."*

In the passage, ''A man that is a heretic (^aigtr&xop api^gfo-
nov) after the first and second admonition reject," the apostle
himself limits the application of the principles above urged on
the Corinthians, by showing that although he forbade the form-
ation of sects or divisions among Christians on the ground of
difference, yet there were occasionally persons in the church,
who if incorrigible, deserved to be cast out of it altogether.
The crime which in the judgment of Paul merited this punish-
ment, he designates by the term heretical (algetixov)^ which
in the English language distinctly refers to one who denies a
fundamental doctrine of Christianity. The original word also
sometimes seems to have this sense ; but more frequently it
signifies a schismatic, one who makes a division, or forms a sect.
In the former acceptation, the passage inculcates the salutary
duty, acknowledged and practised by all the orthodox churches
of the land, of excluding from their communion and from mem-
bership, those who deny a fundamental doctrine of the gospel,
that is a doctrine unitedly believed by all the orthodox churches,
and regarded as essential by them. Some denominations would
exercise still greater rigor, and exclude from their communion
the believers of doctrines held by such sister churches, as they
professedly and sincerely regard as churches of Christ. But

raul wholly repudiates those divisions grounded on diversity of

I - I ■ -i - 1 _^

• Titus 3: 10.

1838.] Dr. Schmucker'i ApptaL 9S

sentimenty which would render it possible for a brother Chris-
tian, when ejected from one portion of the Saviour's church to
find admission to another. At all events, the church in his day
was not thus divided, and those whose excommunication he en-
joined, must in his judgment have forfeited ail claim to the
christian profession. The apostles's rule, therefore, as limited
by himself, would be that we ought not to separate from our
brethren, for any error which we believe them to entertain, and
which does not in our most conscientious judgment deprive
them of all claim to the character of Christians.

The primitive import of the Greek word ttiQimg (heresy) is
MtUdiony choice. Thus it is used by many ancient Greek wri-
ters. The following passage of Aeschines Socrat. (Dial. II. 3,)
amounts, if not to a definition, yet to the most appropriate ex-
emplification of this sense of the term : «/ 6i tig aoi didoitj ui--
Qia&v TOVToJy, Ttdtegov iv povkoio , In this sense we also meet
it in the Septuagint ; (Lev. 27 : 18 and 21,) as equivalent to
n^n: free will, voluntarily. It is also employed to designate a _pe-
culiar kind cf discipline or mode of livings that has been vol-
untarily assumed. But its more common signification* b schism,
division, sect. Thus Dionys. Halic. (£p. I. ad Ammaeum.
c. 7.) says of Aristotle: He was not the leader or head of a
school, nor did he form a sect of hb own (ovte axoXiig i^yovft^
9og, ofs' idictv mnoitjxmg aipiaiv.) It is used by classic writers
to designate the several philosophic sects, the Stoics, the Epi-
cureans, the Peripatetics, etc. It occurs nine times in the New
Testament and in the majority of cases it is translated sect in
the common version. In the other cases it might with equal
propriety be rendered in the same way,t as indeed it is by
many distinguished translators. In its primitive and most cur-
rent signification, therefore, the word {aigeaig) conveys no re-
proach. It is used to designate the sect of Pharisees,]: the sect

* Rosen mUller defines at^&r^g thus : ^'A^Qtfrsoig vox, per se media
eat. Ubi in malam partem sumitur sigoificat idem quod ax^t*^* ^d
restriogitur ad ea diesidea quae fiunt ex opinionum diversitate.

t 3 Pet 2: 1. 1 Cor. 11: 9.

I Acts 15: 5: But there rose up certain of the sect (a^wiq) of the
Pharisees, who believed saying, that it was needful to circumcise
them, and lo command them to keep the law of Moses. Acta 25: 6 :
The Jews knew me firom the beginning if they would testify, that af-
ter the most straitest std {oitQWHi) of our religion, I lived a Pharisee.

94 Dr. Schmucker^s Appeal. [Jan.

of Sadducees,* and the sect of the Nazarenes orChristians.f In
all the passages where it is rendered sect, in the common ver-
sion, it signifies a party of persons who have separated them-
selves from others professedly pursuing the same end, over
whom they profess to have some advantages. Here we have
sects substantially corresponding to those of our days, sects based
not on geographical lines, but on doctrinal diversities like our
own, and yet what does Paul say concerning such sects in the
church of Christ ? Using the very same word by which he
designated the sect of the Pharisees, (in an adjective form,) he
declares : Him that is a sectarian man (^algttMov Sv^gmnov)
an originator or supporter of sects in the christian church, after
the first and second admonition, reject, exclude from your com-
munion and intercourse, avoid. Here we have the apostle again
distinctly condemning the formation of sects in the christian
church, using the very identical term by which the Pharisees
and Sadducees are designated in the New Testament and the
several sects of their philosophers by classic Greeks.

Again, in the third chapter of his first epistle to the Gorin-
thians,:^ Paul denounces such divisions in the christian church
as "carnal.'* "For, (says he) whereas there is among you
envying and strife and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk
as men ? For while one saith I am of Paul, and another I am
of Apollos, are ye not carnal V^ How then can divisions es-
sentially similar, among modem Christians, be pleasing in the
sight of God ? In his letter to the Galatians,^ this same apos-
tle classes these heresies or divisions among " the works of the
fieshJ^ He beseeches the Romans,|| to " mark, (a%ontlv) at-
tentively to observe, or watch those, " who cause divisions and
offences, contrary to the doctrine (or rather the instruction or
advice) which ye have learned : and avoid them." But it
would be an endless work to present all the passages, in which
the sacred volume inculcates the unity of the church, and de-
precates its disruption into sects. Let one other passage termi-
nate this branch of our argument. To the same Corinthians,ir

* Acts 5: 17 : Then the high priest rose up and all they that were
with him, which is the stet (aHqwig) of the Sadducees.

t Acts 94:5, 14. 28: 33. t T.St 4.

§Gfti.5:20: The works of the flesh are — wrath, strife, bereqri or
Moti, divisions.

I 16:17. f 19:12.

1888.] Dr. Schmucker^s Appeal. 96

he says : '* For as the body is one, and hath many members,
and aJl the members of that one body, being many, are one
body ; so also is Christ. For by one Spirit are we all baptiz-
ed into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether
we be bond or free ; and have been all made to drink into one
Spirit. For the body is not one member but many. — Now
they are many members, yet but one body — ^That there should
be no schism in tlie body ; but that the members should have
the same care one for another."* It would seem then to be
kresistibly evident, that tbe unity of the church ought to be sa-
credly preserved by all who love the Lord Jesus ; and without
stopping, at this stage of our investigation, to ascertain all the
precise features of this unity, which will hereafter appear ; it is
evident that the union inculcated by the apostle, is such, as is
inconsistent with the divisions which he reprobates, and such
divisions substantially are those of the present day, which are
all based on some difference of doctrine, forms of government,
or mode of worship among acknowledged Christians.

But the obligation of Christians to preserve the unity of tbe
church, is evident from the example of the apostles^ of the
apostoUc and subsequent age.

It would be superfluous to affirm, that no one of the apostles,
or their fellow laborers established any sects in the christian
church. The bare supposition of the contrary is absurd and
revolting to every mind acquainted with the inspired record.
Yet what ample ground was there for such a course, if it had
been regarded lawful? There was diflerence of opinion among
the apostles, and dLSerence among the first Christians : but
neither was regarded as a cause for schism or division in the
church. Paul differed from Peter and disapproved of his con*
duct so much that (he says^ '^ at Antioch I withstood him to
the face^ for he was to oe blamed :"f yet neither of them
dreamed of forming a sect for the defence and propagation of
his distinctive views. Paul and Barnabas differed about their
arrangements for missionary operations, and when the conten-
tion grew sharp, each took as fellow laborers those whom he
preferred, and thus prosecuted the work ; but it never entered
mto their minds to form different sects in the church. In the
apostolic age there existed differences of opinion and practice
between the Jewish and Gentile converts, far greater than those

t^mmmt-'rm^m^rm^r^m^i^mmmm^mmmm.^i^^.mmi^mmmmmm^^i^mfmmammmm^

« See also Eph. 4 : 3-$. t O^ ^ ll-^U*

96 Dr. Schmucker't Jfypeal. [J Air.

which divide some of the religious denominations of our land,
(the former enjoining circumcision* and other ceremonial ob-
servances) ;t yet they did not divide the church into different
sects under the guidance of the apostles. On tlie contrary
the apostle enjoined mutual forbearance. '' One man (says
Paul) esteemeth one day above another : another esteemeth
every day alike. Lict every man be fully persuaded in his own
mind. He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord ;
and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not re-
gard it — ^But why dost thou judge (condemn) thy brother ? or
why dost thou set at nought (despise) thy brother ? for we
shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.]: Nor did
any schism actually arise from these difierences till the apostles
had gone to their rest, when in direct opposition to this advice,
the Nazaraeans, in the reign of Adrian, separated from the body
of Christians, who however strongly disapproved of their con-
duct. It is certam too that during several hundred years, there
continued to be persons in the church, who exhibited a linger-
ing attachment to the Mosaic ceremonial observances, yet they
were not excluded nor advised to form themselves into a sepa-
rate sect. The observance of the Lord's day or christian Sab-
bath was universal ;^ but some Christians during several cen-

t.

* Acts 15 : 5.

f Qk\. 4:10: Ye observe days and months and times and yeanu
I am afraid, etc

t Romans 14 : 5—10.

$ On the subject of the primitive sanctification of the first day of
the week as the christian Sabbath it may not be uninteresting to ad-
duce the testimony of Justin Martyr, who was born three or four
years after the death of the apostle John, in his Apology for the Chris-
tians, presented to Antoninus Pius, A. D. 150. He says : ** On the day
which is called Sunday, all whether dwelling in the towns, or in the *
villages, hold meetings, and the memoirs ^AnoftrtifiopBVfuna) of the
apostles and the writings of the prophets are read as much as the
time will permit ; then the reader closing, the person presiding, in a
speech exhorts and excites to an imitation of those excellent exam-
ples ; then we all rise and pour forth united prayers, and when we
close our prayers, as was before said, bread is brought forward, and
wine and water; and the presiding officer utters prayers and thanks-
givings according to his ability (ooij dvpifiig ivif) and the people re-
spond by saying Amen. A distribution and participatioB of the things
blessed, takes place to each one present, and to thoee absent it is sent

1888.] Dr. SchmucJctr^i Appeal. 97

turies continued also to observe the Jewish Sabbath as a sacred
day. The time for the observance of Easter was another point
of difierence and even of warm controversy ; yet excepting some
intolerant individuals neither party seriously thought of divid*
ing the church or disowning their brethren on this ground.^
Had these differences existed in our time, who can doubt not
only that separate sects would have grown out of them but that
their formation would be approved by Christians generally ?
Nay is not this question decided by facts ? Is there not a sect
of some extent in our land, the Seventh Day Baptists, who dif-

by the deaconi. Thofle who are prosperous and willing, give what
they choose, each according to his own pleasure ; and what is collect-
ed 18 deposited with the presiding officer, and he carefully relieves
the orphans and widows, and those who from sickness or other causes
are needy, and also those that are in prison, and the strangers that are
residing with us, and in short all that have need of help. fFe edl com*-
mordy hold our assemblies on Sunday, because U is the first day on
whieh God changed the darkness and matter and framed the world ; and
Jesus Christ our Saviour, on the same day, arose from the dead.^ Mur-
dock's Mos. I. p. 164 — 5.

* The testimony of Eusebius on this point is very satisfactory.
He says (Book V. chap. 23,) '* there was a considerable discussion rais-
ed about this time in consequence of a difierence of opinion respect-
ing the observance of the festival (of the Saviour's) passover." — After
narrating the history of this discussion and the efforts of Victor, bish-
op of Rome, to break communion with those who differed from him,
Eusebius quotes an extract from n letter written by Irenaeus to Victor
to persuade him to peace. ^ And though (says Irenaeus to Victor)
they (the earlier bishops) themselves did not keep it, they were not
the less at peace with those from churches where it was kept, when-
ever they came to them. — JSTeither at any time did they cast off any^
merely for the sake of form. But those very presbyters before thee,
who did not observe it, sent the eucharist to those of churches who
did. And when the blessed Polycarp went to Rome, in the time of
Anicetus, and they had a liule difi^^rence . among themselves, about
other matters also, they were immediately reconciled, not disputing
much with one another on this head. For Anicetus could not per-
suade Polycarp not to observe it ; because he had always observed it
with John, the disciple of our Lord, and the rest of the apostles, with
whom he associated. — Which things lieing HO,Mey communed together^
and in the church Aolcetiis yielded to Polycarp : they separated from
each other in peace, all the church being at peace, both those that ob-
serve and those that did not observe, maintaining the peace.** Euseb.
Book V. chap. 24.

Vol. XI. No. «9. 13

96 Dr. Sckmuektr^i jfypeaL [Jah.

fer from other baptbts only in regard to the time of obBerying
the christian Sabbath ; they believing that the seventh day con*
tinues to be the proper one under the New Testament dispensa-
tion, as it was under the Old ? But in the apostolic churches
it was different. There all who were regarded as Christians
and lived in the same pkce, also belonged to the same church,
and worshipped together, agreeing to diflfer in peace on minor
points, and remembering that no Christian has a right to judge,
that is to condemn his brother Christian on account of his con-
scientious difference of opbion. Each one was to be fuUy per-
suaded in his own mind, and prepare to stand with his brother
before the judgment seat of Christ. Neither was to sit in judg-
ment on the other, Christ was to judge both ; and until his final
award their differences were to be borne in love.

Let it be borne in mind, then, that in the apostolic age, when
the church was governed by inspired servants of God, and for
some time after, there was not in the whole christian world anv
such thing as different sects of acknowledged Christians. All
who professed to be Christians, and resided in the same place»
belonged to the same church. And if, as was probably the
case in large cities, they met at different houses for worship,
they nevertheless all regarded each other as members of the
same church or congregation ; they all frequently communed
together, and the reason of different places for meeting, was
not diversity of opinions among them, but because private
bouses in which they assembled, having had no churches till the
third century,* could not contain them all. Heretics there
were, who denied some essential doctrines of Christianity.
These were excluded from the church in which they had
resided, and were then disowned by all other christian church-
es* But different sects of Christians, acknowledging each other
as Christians, yet separated on the ground of diversity of opin-
ioos, such as the different denominations of Protestants are, had
no existence, and were utterly unknown in the apostolic age ;
nor was the great body of the church ever thus cut up, in her
purest day during the earlier centuries. We read of the church
at Corinth, the church at Ephesus, the church in Rome, the
church in Smyrna, the church in Thyatira, the church in Phil-

* The houses for christian worship were erected during the reign
of Alexander Severus between A. D. 222 — 235: yet Vater supposes
them to have existed at the close of the 2d century.

1688.] ])r. Sdmwiker'MJppeal. 99

adelphia, the church in Jerusalem^ the church at Philippi, and
in many other places ; but never of the Pauline church in Cor-
iathy nor of the church that follows Apollos, nor of the church
of Gentile converts, nor of the church of Jewish converts, nor of
the church that retains the observance of the Jewish Sabbath, nor
of the church that does not. In short Christiant in those days
were called Christians and nothing but Christians ; and one
christian church was distinguished from another only by the
name of the place in which it was located. This ought certain-
ly to be a ioiemn ftct to those, who have taken it for granted,
that sectarian divisions of the church are right, that they were
dcing Grod service by their utmost eflbrts to perpetuate them,
bv inscribmg on the tender and infant mind the lineaments of
their denominational peculiarity. One thing does appear unde-
niable. If the sectarian form of Christianity be its best mode
of development, the blessed Saviour himself — with reverence
be it spoken ! — the Saviour and his apostles failed to give it
their injunction ; on the contrary, enjoined and practised direct-
ly the reverse ! ! The writer does not from these &cts infer
the obligation of Christians immediately to renounce their pres-
ent organizations and all merge into one church. Difficulties
now exist arismg from honest diversity of views on church gov-
ernment, which did not exist in the apostolic age, and which render
it impossible for persons thus differing to unite geographically ;
but the essence of christian union may exist, and ought to be
promoted immediately, as will be seen in a subsequent stage of
this discussion. As to a union of all the churches of the land
in one compact ecclesiastical system of judicature, such a one
did not exist in the apostolic age, is undesirable, and dangerous.

But the importance of unity in the body of Christ, and the
duty of promoting it is further demonstrated by the banefid effects
ofiectarian dwisiant.

Sectarian divisions, divisions on the ground of difference^ tend
to destroy that commmiiy of interest, and sympathy of feeling
which the Saviour and his apostles so urgently inculcate. How
fervendy does our blessed Lord supplicate for the unitv of all
his followers ! <' Neither pray I for these (the apostles) alone,
but for them also who shall believe on me through their word ;
that they may all be one, as thou Father art in roe and I in
thee"* — that there may be among them that unity of counsel^

• John 17: 90, dl.

100 Dr. Schmucker^s Appeal. [Jan*

of feeling, of purpose, of action which exists between the Father
and the Son. What can be more reasonable ? If all his dis-
ciples, all who *^ believe in him through the word," are hereaf-
ter to inhabit the same heaven, to surround the same throne of
God and the Lamb ; would not the principle of sectarian di'
visions carry discord into those harmonious ranks, and mar their
heavenly hallelujahs and grate upon the ears of angels and the
Lamb ! No ! sectarianism is an acknowledged and — alas that
it should be so— a cherished trait of the church on earth, which
will never, never be admitted into heaven^ And who can
doubt that the nearer we can bring the church on earth to the
character of the church in heaven, the more pleasing will she
be to him that purchased her with his blood. Accordingly
Paul informs us : '' That there should be no schism in the body ;
but that the members should have the Mome care one for a»-
other ;^ and if one member suffer, all the members suffer with
it, or if one member be honored, all the members rejoice with
it." But, gracious Lord ! is not directly the reverse of this but
too frequency witnessed ? Does not the great mass of the sev-
eral religious denominations of our land, exhibit any thing else
than " the same care," for the other members of Christ's body ?
If one denomination suffers, fails of success or meets with dis-
grace in some unworthy members, do not surrounding denomi-
nations rather at least tacitly and cheerfully acquiesce if not re-
joice, hoping that thus more room will be made and facility
offered ior their own enlargement ? We do not find that mem-
bers of the same family thus cordially acquiesce or triumph in
each others* misfortune or disgrace. If one brother is visited
by any calamity, if he falls a victim to intemperance and bears
about in his bloated face the ensign of his disgrace, do we
find his brothers and sisters rejoice in it ? Do they not rather
sympathize, feel hurt themselves, and mourn over his downfall ?
Thus ought it to be among all who deserve the name of Christ.
Thus would it be, if the community of interest in the Saviour's
family had not been impaired by sectarian divisions which place
several distinct religious families on the same ground, with
separate pecuniary interests, with conflicting prejudices, with ri-
val sectarian aims ! In the apostolic age and for centuries after
it, only one christian church occupied the same field, and thus
three fourths of the causes which originate contention among

• I Cor. 12:25.

1838.] Dr. Schmucker'i Appeal. 101

modem Ckriiiiani votrt avinded. These separate interests,
will always create contention, rivalry and jealousies among fal-
lible men, sanctified but in part, as long as they are not re-
moved or their influence in some way counteracted. And, as
they did not belong to the church constituted by the Saviour
and his apostles, the solemn duty devolves on all Christians
to inquire, how can this evil be remedied ?

Again, sectarian divisions of the church impede the inrnar"
iial study of the sacred volume by ministers ana laymen. The
doctrines believed by what are termed the orthodox churches,
as well as their forms of government and worship, may be di-
^ded into two classes, those which are undisputed and held by
all in common, and those which are disputed by some of them,
and which distinguish the sects iirom each other. The sectari*
an principle builds a wall of defence around the peculiar opin-
ions of each sect.^ It enlists all Christians in defence of the pe-
culiarities of their denomination, and creates powerful motives
of a self-mterested and unholy character in vindication of these
peculiarities, rather than of the grand truths of Christianity,
which are essential to the salvation of all; motives which
appeal to the pride of some, to the avarice of others, and to the
ambition of a third class. Each member is taught by the very
principles of his sinful nature to feel identified with the peculiar
interests of hb sect. His vanity is flattered by the supposed
sespectability of his sect, his ambition is at least tempted by the
prospect of extended influence or distinction in the mmistry or
as a layman in the ecclesiastical councils of his extensive ana re-
spectcMe church, and his avarice is concerned in diminishing his
own expenses by the increasing numbers of his fellow-members^
or, if a mmister, by the ample support which he may obtain.
We would not msinuate that all Christians are influenced by
these unamiable motives, nor that any true disciple of the Sa-
viour is mainly actuated by them. But we fear that the ma-
jority of professors in the church, are more influenced by these
secular considerations, than they are themselves aware. Ac-
cordingly, the peculiarities of sect acquire a factitious impor*
tance, are often inculcated with as much assiduity as the great
and cardinal doctrines of the gospel. Endless and useless con-
troversies about these pomts agitate the church, and disturb her
peace. These peculiarities are instilled into the tender minds
of children, and are often represented as involving the marrow
of salvation. Prejudiccsi are rais^ in their behalf. The tenets

102 Dr. Sekmudcer^i Appeal [Jak.

of other deoominations are often kept out of vieWy or stated in a
manner but ill calculated for an impartial investigation of God's
truth. The antipathies of the social circle are sometimes ar-
rayed in opposition, and, may I say, sometimes in ridicule of
other denominations ;, and even the gender sex, sisters of her
of Bethany, who, sitting at the Master's feet, imbibed the
streams of his love ; sisters of them, who, true to their affectioa,

" Were last at the cross^
And earliest at the grave,**

have hated that Saviour in the person of his folbwers, because
they wore not the badge of their sect ! have forgotten that thm
religion is love, — ^that charity, divine charity is the brightest or*
nament of their nature ! Under such circumstances, doubts of
the sectarian peculiarities inculcated, would expose the ingenuous
youth who should avow them, to social inconveniences, to paren*
tal disapprobation, and rarely does he enjoy amfde oportunity
for impartial investigation, before aduh age. The fact that al-
most invariably, young persons adopt and prefer the peculiar
sectarian views of their parents, is a demonstrative proof thai
their preference is not buUt on argument, that the mode of re-
ligious education in the different churches is unfavorable to im-
partial investigation. The simple circumstance of parental be-
lief, is assuredly no satisfactory proof of the creed which we
adopt on account of it. For the same reason, we would have
been Mohammedans, if bom in Turkey, PapiBts in Italy, and
worshippers of the Grand Lama in Thibet. And ministers of
the gospel have still greater obstacles to surmount, as their dis-
belief of the peculiarities of their sect tarnishes their reputatioo
with their associates, yea, not unfrequently excludes them from
their pastoral charge, and their families from daily bread ! Is
it not evident, then, that the state of the christian church
amongst us is unfitvorable to the impartial study of the volume
of divine truth ?

> Lastly, the principle of sectarian divisions jpot^er/icffy retards
the spiriiual conquests of Christianity over the world. Who
that knows aught of the divine life, can doubt, that in propor-
tion as he permits pride, envy, jealousy, hatred to arise in his
heart, the spirit of piety languishes, his graces decline and his
sense of the divine presence is impaired ? But sectarianism, by
which m this discussion we generally mean the principle of di-
visions on the ground of <&fferenoe, in nonessentials among thoee

1888.] JOr. SAmiiek$r^$ ,^fp0at. 108

wko pPDibtt IQ regard eaeb other as fellow ChrktiaDSy seclariBD«
hm indubitaUj creates varioas conflictiiig bterests, presents du»
meroas occasioDs and temptations to enrv, hatred, jealousy, sfain-
der, and creates an atmosphere around the Christian, in which
Che flame of piety cannot bum with lustre, and not unfrequently
expires«

What observer of tran^iring scenes can doubt, that the sec-
tarian strife and animosity between the churches, deter many
sinners from makbg religion the subject of their chief concern
and from being converted to God ? The Saviour prayed : That
they afl may be erne, as thou Father art in me and I in thee ; that
they may also be one in us ; that the world may believe that
Aau hast sent me." Here then, the Saviour himself informs
us what influence unity among his -followers was designed to
«Act ; history tells that when surrounding heathen were con-
strained to say *^ see how these Christians love one another,''
the moral influence of their example was amazbg : and who
can doubt that inverse causes produce inverse effects.

How often does not the principle of sect, exclude the Ues-
sed Saviour from our villages and sparsely populated sections of
country, in which united Christians might support the gos-
pel ; but cut up into jealous and disc<mant sects, and bating
one another as though each believed a differ^st Christ, all re-
main destitute of the stated means of grace 1 The occasional
vMbs of ministers of different sects serve to confirm each party
in its own predileedons, and thus we often witness the melan-
oboiy spectacle of the Savioitf excluded from such places by
the dissensions of his professed friends, and sinners slmc out
from the sMcCQary of God because saints cannot agree whether
PiMil or Apollos or Cephas shall minister unto them.

Nor is the principle of sect, less unfriendly to the spread of
the gospel in heathen lands. By often stationing on the same
gioimd at home, more men than are necessary, or can be sup-
ported, laborers are improperly withdrawn from the destitute
portions of the field, which is ^' the world ;" conflicting inter-
ests unavoidably arise among the ministers and churches thus
crowded togetlMM*; as fdl cannot long continue, a struggle fcr
existence is caarried on, more or less openly, «Lnd with different
degrees of violence, until the feilure of one or more drives them
from the field, and makes room for the others. Nor is this coo*
fiict to be attributed so much to the want of piety in the parties,
as to that actual conflict of interests which unavoidaUy results

104 Dr. Schmuek^sJlppeal. 1888.]

from the influence of sects. But certainly eyeiy true CbiistiaQ
must deplore this state of things, and it is the writer's deliberate
conviction, that one of the bitterest ingredients in the cup of
ministerial sorrow^ in many portions of our land, is this unholy
and unhappy strife among brothers. In short it is a solemn and
mournful truth, that sectarianism, the principle of sect, in a
great measure changes the directi(»i in which the energies of
the church are applied, transfers the seat of war from pagan
to christian lands, from the territc^ of Christ's enemies into
the very family of his friends ! In the beginning the church
of the Redeemer at peace at home, directed all her surplus en-
ergies against the world around her and the world of Jews and
Gentiles in foreign lands. The war was waged not by one
portion of Christ's family against another, but empha^ally
and distinctly by the church against the world ; such was the
almighty force of the spiritual artillery wielded in this holy war,
that m about three hundred years the little band of fishermen
and tentmakers, fought their way to the utmost bounds of the
Roman empire, and the banner of king Jesus, which was first
unfiirled in the valleys of Judea, was waving in triumph o'er
the palace of the Caesars. But who can deuy, that a large por-
tion of the energies of christian sects is now expended in con-
tending With each other, in building up walls of partition, in for-
tifying and defending those peculiar views by which they are
kept asunder ? The war is no longer a foreign, it is an intes-
tine one. How large a portion of the periodical literature of
the day is occupied in these fiimily feuds, and consists of mere
'' doubtfiil disputations !" How large a portion of ministerial
talent is placed in requisition to sustain this conflict ? How
many precious hours of time are thus applied ? If all the time
and talent and effort spent by the orthoidox protestant churches
in disputing with one another about the points of their dififer-
ence, since the blessed Reformation, had been devoted to the
projects of benevolent enterprise for the unconverted heathen
world, who can calculate the progress that might have been
made in evangelizing the gentile nations ? Let every true dis-
ciple of the Saviour inquire, why do 600 millions of our fellow
men languish in the shadows of death eighteen hundred years
after the blessed gospel has been entrusted to christian hands
for them ? Four and fifty times has the entire population of
the globe been swept into eternity, since the Saviour commis-
sioned his disciples to publish the glad tidings to every crea-

1888.] Dr. Schiuudcer's Appeal. 105

tuie. Who that has witnessed the prompt and overwhehning
blessing of God on the eSoits of the little band of Christians in
Europe and America during the last thirty years ; who that has
seen a natioD new-created almost in a day in the isles of the
Pacific, and witnessed the standard of the cross erected in Af-
rica, in GhreecCy in Turkey, in Hindoostan, in Ceylon, in China
and many other places ; and the glorious gospel of the Son of
God translated into about one hundred and fifty languages; who
that reflects on the millions of Bibles and the tens of millions of
tracts which the united bands of liberal minded Christians have
sent forth, can doubt that if the christian church had not be-
come secularized by the unhappy union with the civil govern-
ment under Constantino in the fourth century, the world had
long ago been evangelized. Or if the Protestant church had
not been split into so many parties by adopting the new, and
we must believe unauthorized and pernicious doctrine, that they
had a BIGHT to adopt for themselves and require of others as
terms of communion, not only the fundamental doctrines which
were required in the earlier Centuries and were supposed suf-
ficient far hundreds of years after the apostolic age, but also as
many additional and disputed points as they pleased^ thus di-
viding the body of Christ and creating internal dissensions ; who
that is acquainted with her history can doubt that greater, far
greater, inroads would have been made into the dominions of
the papal beast, and the glorious gospel of the Son of God, in
the three centuries since the Reformation, have been carried
to the ends of the earth.

Such then being the mournful consequences of that disunion
against which the Saviour and his apostles so urgently admon-
bhed their followers, we feel with double force, that the church
has been guilty of suicidal error, and that it is the solemn duty
of every fiiiend of Jesus, sincerely to inquire. Lord what wouldst
thou have me do to bed the wounds of thy dismembered body !

Deeply impressed with the conviction, that the blessed Sa-
viour and his apostles have explicitly inhibited the division of
the body of Christ into sectarian parties or Actions, and fully
persuaded that these divisions which exist among Protestants
generally, at hast with their present concomitantsy are highly
prejudicial to the prosperity of Zion ; let us approach the in-
quii^, what is the more tmmediate and specific nature of that

Vol. XI. No. 29. 14

106 Dr. Sehmucker^s Appeal. [Jak*

union, which characterized the primitive churchy and which it
is obligatory on us to promote. As Protestants, who are ready
to exclaim with Chilliogworth, « the B^le, the Bible'' is the
only infallible source of our religion, we must naturally turn our
eyes to its sacred pages ; nor can we with safety rely on the
practice of the church in any subsequent age, except in so far
as it accords with apostolical example, or at least is a manifest
development of principles clearly inculcated in the gospel. It
is indeed worthy of remark, that we know next to nothing of
the history of the christian church during more than a hundred
years after its first establishment^ except what is contained in
the New Testament. This has often been regretted by men ;
but God has doubdess designedly enveloped that early period
of her uninspired history in darkness, to compel us to rest en-
tirely on his own infallible word, and to draw a clear and broad
litie of distinction between the authority of his inspired servants
and that of the fathers of the church in after ages. The histo-
ry and practice of the earlier ages when known, may affi>rd an
occasional illustration of our subject; yet, as protestants, wecan
acknowledge nothing as essential to the character of the church,
or the duties of her members, which is not distinctly contained
in the sacred volume.

It is certain, that this union did not consist in any compact
ecclesiastical organization of the entire church in a nation or
empire under one supreme judicatory .

Excepting an occasional interposition of apostoUcal authority,
we are informed, that each church attended to its own affairs of
government and discipline. Addressing the Corinthians,* Paul
says " Do not ye judge (xglvsie) them that are within ? There-
fore put ye away (/£a()ar«) from among yourselves tliat wick-
ed person ;" manifestly attributing to the Corinthians the right
to discipline and exclude an unworthy member from their body.
The same right of supervision and discipline over her members,
is attributed to each individual church by the Saviour himself :f
'^ If thy brother trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault
between thee and him alone" — and eventually, if other means
should fail, '^ tell it to the church" Nor do we find in either
of these cases any ultimate reference to a judicatory consisting
of representatives firom several, much less from all other chris-

* 1 Cor. 5: 12. f Matt. 18: 15 — 17. See also 2 Cor. 2: 7.

1838.] Dr. SchfMickef^s Appeal. 107

tian churches. The phraseology* of the New Testament evi-
dently implies, that each church was a distinct and complete
church and a member of the body of Christ. It is however
equally certain, that the New Testament presents in addition to
several minor consultations, one example of a council or synod^f
whose members were ^^ the apostles, elders (that is, preachers),
and brethren (that is, lay members)," and who assembled at
Jerusalem ibr the purpose of settling a dispute touching the ob-
ligation of christian converts to observe ^^ the law of Moses, etc.''
This synod was convened for a special purpose, was a pro re
nata convention, and although it fully sanctions the call of such
meetings as often as necessary, and justifies a provision for sta-
ted meetings if experience establishes their necessity and utility ;
yet it cannot with any plausibility be aUeged, that the churches
were then regularly united into such synods, or that such meet-
ings were held regularly, at fixed times. Had they been of an-
nual recurrence, who can doubt that some trace of the fact, or
allusion to it, would be found in the Acts of the apostles or the
epistles of Paul, which cover a period of about thirty years, and
narrate or allude to the prominent events in the history of the
church during that period ? These &cts urge upon our atten-
tion several important positions, the value of which will be more
evident in the sequel. They are these :

a) TJiot the dtvine Head of the church has irUnuted the
^reai man of the duties and privileges of his kingdom to the
tndividual churches in their primary capacity. Hence, though
the churches ought to take counsel with each other, and for
this purpose may have stated fneetingSy and constitute regular
synods^ they should not suffer any encroachments on their rights,
nor permit too much of their business to be transacted by these
dekgated associations or presbyteries or synods. The neglect
of tnis caution gradually robbed the churches of their rights
and liberties in past ages, and fostered that incubus of Christiani-
ty, tbepapal hierarchy at Rome.

b) The duty of fraternal consultation and union of counsel
ought not to be neglected by the church in the discharge of
her duties. This pnnciple evidently afibrds sanction to the va-
rious associations among the churches such as presbyteries, sy-

•Oal. 1:3. 1 Cor. 16:1. 2 Cor. 8: 1. 1 Then. 3: 14. Acts. 9: 3K
15c 41.

t Acts XV.

106 Dr. SchmuekerU Appetd. [JAif*

nods, etc., for the purposes of mutual counsiel, encouragement
and cooperation in the performance of such duties as can best
be accomplished hj conjunction of means and efforts. Tet the
history of past ages distinctly admonishes us to beware of the
natural tendency to consolidation in church as well as State.
There is doubtless danger of the concentration of power in the
hands of ecclesiastical judicatories, which has in former ages,
alas ! been but too frequentiy abused to purposes of oppression
and bloodshed, to the destruction of liberty of conscience, and
the obstruction of the Redeemer's spiritual kingdom. It ap-
pears inexpedient for the churches to devolve on their delega-
ted judicatories, such duties as they can perform as well in
their primary capacity for another reason ; because, when du-
ties 01 various kinds are accumulated on any individual bodies,
they must necessarily be less able to discharge them all with
efficiency.

It is evident then, that in the apostolic age, the unity of the
church did not consist in a compact conjunction of all her parts
in an ecclesiastical judicatory. On the contrary, we have no
accounts of any synods or councils after that age, until the lat-
ter part of the second century. Eusebius, the earliest author
by whom the transactions of these councils are recorded, uses
the following language, from which it is highly probable that'such
councils were nothing new, and that similar ones had been occa-
sionally held during the previous seventy-five years which had
intervened since the death of the last apostie :* " About this
time appeared Novams, a presbyter of the church of Rome,
and a man elated with haughtiness agdnst those (that had fall-

* EuBob. Book 6. chapter 43. 'j&rci^ nt^ t^ mna Tovrisr agMs
vmori^apla Noovaxog inc 'Pomakȴ htftXiifflaf noHrSvuoofj ig iKrptkt
oCoiK alndif nmnqlaq iknidog, iirfi d nivxa id ^ ht^^oq^t yPn^ktr
ual xa&agity i^ofiolopitrit inixtloUif^ idlag aloitnoig j&p xati lo/urfiov
awrUwof Ka&oQOvg iavtovg inwprpfmnwp^ af^xyt/oq itu^Urttnw, up
^ ffwodov (uyhifig inl *Plifn^ irvpcQwtfi&tUnig, k^nona fABv tor iifi&^
flit inifntinwf^ nXtiovwf d§ bu ftalXov nq&ipviiqwf %z wal dwaw¥W9^
Idimq %9 WKta %aq hitniq ina(fxUiS twv natit /oi^ay noi^iay ntQl tov
nQctxnov dtamu^afihtup, doyfia naqUrtaxai xdiq nwrt * Toy fjth IVoovo-
Tor tf/Mt xfili a\n& owsaaq&iUn^ toitq t« avrtvdoMUP t^ fiuretdiXtptu ical
inardQWifnatri yvmfvfi %ayi(fog ngoaigopvirovg, iv aXloxqloiq t^; itofXi^
^ias ffyBur&a* ' roitg di t^ frv(tq>0Q^ ntginattrntoiag x&y idelq>Wf latr-
^ai nal ^BQonBVHy tolg tt]( lixavoiag (pufffiaMis, Edit. Zimmermann,
VoL I. p. 464, 465.

1888.] Dr. Schmucker^s Appeal. 109

en)y as if there were no room for them to hope (or salvation,
not even if thev performed all things which belong to a genuine
conversion, and a pure confession. He thus became the leader
of the peculiar sect of those, who inflated by vain imaginations,
called themselves Cathari. A very large council being held at
Rome on this account, at which sixty bishops and a still great-
er number of presbyters and deacons were present, and the pas*
UMTS of the remaining provinces, having according to their loca-
tion deliberated sepanttely what should be done ; thb decree
was passed by all : That Novatus and those who so arrogantly
united with Imn, and those that had chosen to adopt the unchar-
itable and most inhuman opinion of the man, should be ranked
among such as are aliens from the church (excluded) ; but that
such of the brethren, as had fallen during the calamity (perse-
cution), should be treated and healed with the remedies of re-
pentance,"

This B the earliest account extant of any regular synod after
the apostcdic age. The absence of even the least intimation,
that this assembly was any thing novel, confers a high degree
of probability on the supposition diat other similar meetings had
oocesioDally occurred before. But it was not until the close of
the second, or begbning of the third century, that these asso-
ciations began to bold regular and itated meeiingi. This prac-
tice was fint introduced m Greece, where the popular mind had
been familiarized to such stated representative conventions, by
the Ampbictionic Council, and would naturally be inclined to
transfer to the church, what had proved so acceptable in State.*
Still the introduction of regular stated meetmgs had to encoun-
ter some opposition, for Tertullian, in the commencement of
the third century, found it necessary to undertake their defence.f
By the middle of the third century, however, these stated an-
nual meetings had become very general.| Lay representatives

* See Neander's Kirchengeschichte, Vol. I. p. 333. Tertallian's
words are, ** Aguntur per Graeeias ilia eeHi§ m locis coocilia, ex uni-
verBis ecciesiis, per quae et altiora quaeqne in commune traotaotur et
ipsa repreeentatio totius nominis ChristiaDi magna veoeratione oele-
bratur.** Be Jejuoiia, c. 13.

t ** lata solennta, quibus tune praesene paunockiatus est Sermo.^— •
TertuUian.

t Cyprian, fip. 40. and FirmiHanua, (apud Cyprian. Ep. 75.) of
Cappadocla : Neceasario apad Boa fit, ut per atngulos annoa aeoioNa
et pmepeaiti 'In unum eooveniaaMis, ad diapooeoda «a quae cune
noatrae commian aunt. Neander sup. cit p. 329.

110 Dr» Sdmucket^s Appeal. [Jan.

were at first admitted to these councils, as the ^^ brethren" evi-
dently had been b the apostolic age ; but in process of time
the bishops secured all this power to themselves.* These con-
ventions were merely provincial, and embraced the churches of
only one particular country or province. The entire christian
church was not yet united by any supreme judicatory, having
jurisdiction over all its parts, as eventuaUy occurred under the
papal hierarchy ; but here we find for the first time a visible
untan of all the acknowledged churches in aparticvlar coiw^
try under one ecdesiasticai judicatory. Sucn an extensive
union in one judicatory, could not long fail to abridge freedom
of investigation and liberty of conscience ; if its powers were
not purely those of an advisory cauncUy and its advice confined
to matters originatbg between the smaller judicatories and con-
templadng their relation to each other, andf the progress of the
church in general.

Agam, the primitive unity of the church of Christ did not
consist in the organization of the whole church on earth under
one visible heady such as the pope at Home and the papal hie*
rarchy. We shall not here stop to prove, that the power given
alike by the Saviour to all the apostles,! could not confer any
peculiar authority on Peter : nor that Peter's having professed
the doctrine of the Saviour's Messiahship, on which the Lord
founded his church, does not prove that he founded it on Peter
himself, making him and his successors his vicars upon earth.
It is admitted by aU Protestants that the pope is a creature as
utterly unknown to the Bible as is the Grand Lama of the
Tartars. It is well known, that the papal hierarchy is the
gradual production of many centuries of corruption. In the
third century the churches of a particular kmgdom or province,
were united by provincial synods ; but it remained for the ar-
dent Afirican bbhop Cyprian, after the middle of the third cen-
tury, by an unhappy confiision of the visible with the invisible
church, to develope in all its lineaments the theory of a neces-

* Neaoder sap. cit. p. 334.

t Matt 16: 19 : And I will give unto thee (Peter v. 18) the keys
of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth,
shall be bound in heaven ; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth
shall be loosed in heaven. Chap. 18: 1, 18 : At the same time came
the disciples unto Jesus, etc. — He said— Verily I say unto you (disci-
ples V. 1) whatsoever ye shall bind on earth, shall be bound in hea-
ven : and wlnitsoever ye shall loose on earth, shall be loosed in heaven.

1838.] Dr. Schmueker^i Jfypeal. 1 1 1

saiy visible udiod of the whole church on earth in one unifonn
external organization, under a definite apostolic succession of
bishopSy as the essential channel of the Spirit's influences on
earth, transmitted by ordbaticm.* It is only under the influ-
ence of this ccHifused theory, that enlightened and good men
could believe in the impossibili^of salvation without the pales
of their own visible church ! That such a man as Augustintj
could advance the following sentiments in the official epistle of
the Synod assembled at Cirra in the year 412 : Quisquis ab
hac catholica ecclesia fuerit separatus, quantumlibet laudabiliter
se vivere existimet, hoc solo scelerty quod a Christi unitate dis-
junctus est, non habebit vitam, sed ira Dei tnanei super ipsum.
Quisquis autem in ecclesia bene vixerit, nihil ei praejudicant
aliena peccala, quia unusqtdsque in ea proprium onus portahity
€t quicimqrue in ea corpus Christi tnanducaverit indigneyjudi^
cium sUn manducat et bibity quo satis ostendit apostolus, quia
non aheri manducat sed n6t— communio malorum non maculat
aliquem participadone sacramentorum, sed consensione £icto-
rum.f And in his own work '* De fide et symbolo," written
about twenty years earlier, he says :% ^^We believe that the
church is both holy and universal (i. e. one). T%e heretics y
hotoevery also denominate their congregations churches. But
they, by entertaining false views concerning Ood, do violence
to the christian faith : the schismatics on the other handy
although they agree with us in doctrine, forsake brotherly love
hy creating pernicious divisions.^*

It is easily perceptible, how this erroneous idea of the neces-
sary visible combination of all the churches under one organiza-

* Neander's Kirehtogeschichte, Vol. I. p. 330, 331.

t Fuch's Bibliotbok der KircbenversamraluogeD, Vol. III. p. 303.
^ Whoever separates himself from this universal church, however
praiseworthy be may suppose his general conduct to be, shall not
obtain life on account of this crime ahrUy that he is separated from
the unity of Christ, but the torath of God ahidtth on him. But who-
ever leads an exemplary life In the church, shall not be injured by the
sins of others, because in it (the church) everyone shall bear his own
burden, and whoever eateth the body of Christ unworthily, shall eat
and drink judgment to himself by which the apostle clearly sbows^
that as he eats not for another, but for himself*— it is not the commu-
nion with the wicked in the reception of the sacraments, which con-
taminates any one, but his aswnt to their evil deeds."

t Koepler's Bibliothek der Kircbenvater, Vol. IV. p. 240.

1 12 Dn Sehmucker's Appeal* [Jan.

cion, as the supposed exclusive channel of the diTine inflnenee
and favor, would naturally tend to jbcilitate the ultimate adop*
tion of the papal hierarchy ; for here, and here alone, in the
holy father, is to be found one visible, tangible head, adapted
to the one universal visible church. That this opinion how-
ever, was not that of the apostles or of the apostolic age, is
confirmed by the concurrent testimony of all writers in the
earlier centuries. On this subject an interesting testimony has
reached us in the Apostolic Canons, so called because the work
professes to be and m the main is a collection of the principal
'Customs and regulations for the government, discipline, etc. of
the christian church during the first four centuries from die days
of the apostles. It was most probabhr compiled sh(»rtly after
the time of Augustine, in the middle of the fifth centurv, and
'clearly proves that the exclusive pretensions of the bishop of
Rome were not acknowledged even at that time : It reads thus :

Canon 33. J%e bishops of each nation should know the
principal one among them^ and regard him as their head (loiv
Jti taxoTioiv i%aatov i^vovg Mewai X9V ^^^ i* avtoiQ ngatov, mk2
li/ifb&M €iviO¥ cJff *fq>€tXtip) and undertake nothing ofimpor*
tance without his advice. But each one should himself attend
to what belongs to his own church and neighborhood. But
-even he ought to do nothing without consuUati^m ufith others
(jilXa fifjde ixiipog a»€v ttig nuptmp fpwftfjg noustss r«). Herein
consists the true unity (of the church), and such a course wiB
tend to the glory of Qod through Jesus Qiristj in the Holy
S^rU.''

In short it is well known, that the Inshop of Rome did not
lobtain even the title of universal bishop until, in the seventh
tsentury, ^^ Bonifiice HI. engaged Phocas, the Grecian EmpercNr,
^ho waded to the throne through the blood of Mauritius, to
take fix>m the bishop of Constantinople the title of oecumenical
or universal bishop, and to confer it on the Roman pontiff."
His dignity as a temporal prince he did not receive tdl in the
eighth century, when the usurper Pq^n, in consideration of the
aid afibrded him by the pontiff in treasonably dethroning hb
predecessor, granted " the exarchate of Ravenna, and Penta*
polls" to the Roman pontiff, and his successors in the pretended
apostolic see of St. Peter. There can therefore be no question
as to the truth of our position, that the primitive church was
not united under one visible head, such as the pope and papal
hierarchy.

1838.] Dr. Schmutk^w Appeal 118

Finally, it is certain that the unity of the primitive church
did not consist in absolute unanifnity tn religious sentiments.
This assertion may appear startling to some. '' What !" (some
of my readers may be ready to exclaim) " was there any diver-
sity of opinion in the primitive ohurch, under apostolic guidance?
we have always supposed, that there existed a perfect agree-
ment on all points among the 6rst Christians, and that the proper
method to restore the primitive purity of the church is to insist
on agreement on all points from those who could unite with us
as a church of Christ." This opinion has also prevailed for
many centuries, and has been the prolific mother of extensive
and incalculable evils in the christian church. It has led to the
persecution and death of milHons of our fellow men under the
papal dominion, it has caused endless divisions and envyings
and strife in the Protestant churches.

Its &]lacy we think appears from the following considerations :

It is rendered highly probable by the fact that the Scriptures
contain no provision to preserve absolute unity of sentiment on
all points of religious doctrines and worship if it ever had existed.
Many points of doctrine and forms which men at present regard
as important, are not decided at all in the sacred volume. Other
points are inculcated in indefinite language, which admits of sev-
eral constructions. The diversity of views derived from these
records by the several religious denominations of equal piety, of
«qual talent and equal sincerity, indisputably establishes the fact,
that they do not contain provision for absolute unity of sentiment
nmong Christians. Now as all admit the substantial similarity
of the oral instnictions of the apostles to the primitive Christians,
and their written instructions in the sacred volume, it follows
that the impressions made on an audience of primitive Chris-
tians would be the same ; except perhaps in the case of a few
individuals who might have opportunity of personal intennews
and more minute inquiry with the apostles. With the greatest
ftcility the Author of our holy religion could have made such
provision. He did by inspiration endow his apostles with every
requisite qualification not naturally possessed by them, and led
them into all necessary truth. Now as they have left many
points of doctrine and forms of worship and government unde-
cided, and as they do not express with philosophical precision
the doctrines which they do teach, it is a just inference that one
reason why these minor differences are not obviated in the
church, and all tiuly pious, able and futhful Christiana do

Vol. XI. No. 29. 15

114 Dr. SchmueJcer's Appeal. [Jan.

not agree on all points is, that the sacred volame has not made
prpvbion for such absolute unanimity. Let no one here assert
thai haman language is so deficient, and the education and
habits of men so diverse, that they will impose different con-
structions ) on any composition. The contrary is the case.
Even uninspired men of well disciplined mind, have often ex-
pressed their views on these topics in language which is not mis-
understood. Is there any doubt, in any well informed mind, as
to the opinions taught on the several topics which separate the
principal protestant churches, by Calvin in bis Institutes, or by
Whitby on the Five Points?^ In regard to the meaning of
some protestant creeds there has been, it is true, not a little
controversy. But the framers of these Confessions designedly
used language somewhat generic and indefinite, in order that
persons of not entirely accordant sentiments might sign them,
and modern disputants of each party have endeavored to prove
these creeds favorable only to their own views. Or, persons
charged with deviation from an adopted creed, and believing
themselves to adhere to its general tenor, are naturally inclined
to interpret its indefinite or generic terms in favor of their own
views, whilst their opponents, pursuing a contrary course, strain
those same expressions as far as possible in a different direction.
But it will not be denied, that it would be no difficult task for
any well educated divine to make, in a single octavo page, such
a statement of doctrines, as would distinguish any one of the
prominent protestant denominations from all others, — to firame a
creed, concerning whose real meaning, there would be no dif-
ference of opinion. Therefore, as the written instructions of
the apostles and other inspired writers, do not contain provision
to produce absolute unanimity among the pious, since the apos-
tolic age, and as these very written instnictions were addressed
to the primitive Christians, and were the only inspired instruct
tions which many of them possessed ; there can be but little
doubt, that if a dozen of those Christians had been required to
state their views on all the points of diversity between protest
tant Christians, it would have been found, that the impressions
then made by these books, were not more definite than those
which they now produce on the same points of doctrine. And
as the oral teaching of the apostles was doubtless substantially the
aame as their recorded instructions ; the impression made by
them on the entire primitive church was probably the same so
far as doctrines are concerned ; whilst it is evident, that in re-

1838.] Dr. Schmttcker's Agpcal. US

gud to the apostles' mode of worship and church govenuneDt,
there could have been but one opinion, among those who had
witnessed them with their own eyes^ Again, the fact that the
Bible is not constituted so as to obviate this diversity of senti«-
ment, when it might easily have been so formed by the hand
of inspiration, is cmdtuive proof that the points of diversity
among real and enlightened Giristiansy are not and cannot be
of essential importance.

But the existence of diversity of opinion in the apostolic
churches is placed ieyond all possible doubt by the express
declaration of the apostle Pauly who, knowing that such dlfier-
ences would continue to exist in after ages, has also prescribed
regulations for our conduct towards those who may differ from
us : * ^^ Him that is weak in the faith, receive ye but not (in
order) to (engage in) disputations with him about doubtful mat-
ters. For one believeth that he may eat all things : another,
who is weak, eateth herbs. Let not him that eateth, despise
him that eateth not ; and let not him that eateth not, judge him
that eateth ; for God hath received him. Who art thou that
judgest another man's servant ? To his own master he standeth
(M* ialleth. — One man esteemeth one day above another ; anoth*
er esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully per«>
suaded in his own mind. He that regardeth the day, regardeth
it to the Lord ; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord
he doth not regard it. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for
be giveth God thanks ; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he
eateth not, and giveth God thanks. — But why dost thou judge
thy brother ? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother I fov
we shaU all stand before the judgment seat of Christ."

Here then we have the express testimony of the aposde, that
differences of opinion did exist among the pimitive Christians
at Rome in reference to at least two points, the diversity of
meats and the question whether all days should be regarded as
equally holy, or whether the Jewish distinction of days should
be observed by Christians. Both the points of difference are
moreover of such a character, relating to matters of fact, tangi-
ble and visiUe in their nature, that any regulation which the
apostle may have previously given. Christians would be aided
in comprehending, by observing the example and practice of
the apostles themselves. They were matters too concerning

• Rom. 14: 1—13.

1 16 Dr. S^mucker^s Appeal. [Jak

one of which he had seven years before excNreflsed his opioioB
in pretty evident language to tlie Ghilatian brethren, when be
said : * '' How turn ye again to the weak and beggarly ele»
ments whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage ? Ye ob*
serve days and months and times and years ; I am afraid of
you lest I have bestowed upon you labor in vain." And how
does the apostle settle this dispute among the Romans ? How
does he introduce perfect unity of sentiment among them on
this point of christian duty ? it is worthy of special observa-
tion, that he does not even attempt to induce them all to think
alike ; but enjoins on each one obedieuce to the dictates of his
own conscience, and on all abstbence front every attempt to
condemn or censure their brethren for honest difference of opin**
ion ; he enjoins on all mutual forbearance and brotherly unity I
Be it remembered too, that this point of difference among the
primitive Christians,! b one, on which the declarations of the
New Testament have produced pretty general unanimity among
modern i»x>testant Christians, whilst it is a matter of historical
notoriety that the diversity on this very topic was not entirely
banbhed from the primitive church a century after all the boo]i»
of the New Testament which tpuch on the subject had been
written.

Again, look at the church of Corinth itself, whose attempts
at division Paul so decidedly censured. The apostle explicitly
informs us, that some members of the Corinthian church itnp-
ed the resurrection of the body. As to the reason of their de-
nial, whether the leaven of the Sadducees had infected them,
or whether, as Greeks, they were misled by their philosophy
falsely so called, and with Celsus despised the doctrine as ^' the
hope of worms," the eXnig anwlTinwp, we know not ; but for
the fact Paul is our authority. " How," he remarks, " say
some amow you, that there is no resurrection of the dead ?"
He then advances several arguments in favor of the doctrine,
answers the philosophical objections to it, and proves to them
tbe fiillacy of their opinion on this subject ; but not the least
intimation b given, that those who believe in the resurrection
should separate from those who denied it. Thb doctrine bad

• Gal. 4: 10.

t According to tbe earliest records extant the difference in the
time of celebrating Easter is referred to the apostles tJiemeelves. See
Dr. Mardock's Mosheim 1. 102, 103. 164.

1638.] l)r. Sehnmcker's Ajppeal. 1 17

not, it IS true, been so amply unfolded by any inspired writer
as is done by Paul in bis epistle to these very men, and we are
unable to perceive how any believer in the Scriptures could
now denv this doctrine. Yet the fact of the resurrection, to
say nothing of the Old Testament, bad been disunctly affirmed
by the Saviour and his apostles, as must have been known to
the Corinthians.

It is therefore absolutely certain that the bond of primitive
union, was not that of perfect unity of sentiment on religious
subjects even in the days of the apostles themselves. That dif«
fer^aces on other topics, especially on minor points of abstract
doctrine, also existed, is evident from the iact ex{Nres8ly decla*
redt (I^ some even went so iar as to fell into fundamental doc*
trinal error, such as to ^^ deny tlie Lord that bought them."
Now every rational man will admit, that the progress of the
human mind in the fluctuation of opinions is gradual, and that
where the extremes occurred the intermediate gradations must
have existed* It seems almost impossible for a mind elevated
but a single grade above savageism, when for example the doc^
trine was taught that Christ made an atonement for sinners, not
to advert to ^e persons for whom this atonement was made,
and to understand the declarations of the gospel as teaching,
that it was made for somebody, either for all men or a portion
of mankind. But although we have no reason to imagine that
the same books which are diiSerently understood by modem
Christians, could have produced absolute unity of opinion among
them ; we 6nd no certain traces of duitndon about points of
abitrad doctrine. As these abstract differences had no per-
ceptible influence on christian practice, the priniitive Christians
probably did not even compare their views on many points of
modern controversy, and may have differed on some minor top-
ics without knowing it* Yet on some points they differed and
discussed ; but Paul dissuades them fiom indulging in '^ doubt-
fol disputations."*

Having thus, as we suppose, satis&ctorily ascertained, that the
bond of union among the apostolic churches did iiot consist in a
compact ecclesiastical organization of the entire church in any
nation or country under one supreme judicatory ; nor in the

*

* Rom. 14: 1 : Him diat is weak in the faith (who has not fully ap-
prehended all the christian doctrines) receive ye, but not to doubtful
disputations (/ii| us dumQhug dialoywfi&p^ withojut deciding on his
seruples).

118 Dr. Sehmucker^s Appeal. [J ait*

orgamizatum of the whole church on earth under cne. vitiUe
head, such as the pope and papal hierarchy ; and finally, that it
did not consist in e^solute unanimiiy of religious Beniiment ; it
remains for us to inquire into the positive elements which did
compose it — ^whtkt each congregation transacted its ordinary
business of government and discipline for itself, and constituted
as it were one member of the body of Christ, what were the
ties by which these several members were united together, and
by which the spirit of brotherly love was preserved among
them?

We here presuppose the prevalence among the primitive
Christians of that unity of spirit, which gave life and value to
all the external forms of union. Without this, the church, even
if externally bound together by a bond of iron, would be a life*
less trunk destitute of that pervading spirit that gives interest
and animaUon to the whole. But on this subject we are not
permitted to cherish a moment's doubt. We are expressly
told by Luke in his Acts of the Apostles :* ^^ And the mud*
titude of them that believed, were of one heart and of one soui.^*
Then it was that the disciples continued " with one accord,
breaking bread from house to house, and did eat their meat
with gladness and with singleness of heart, praising God and
having favor with the people.''! It is this unity of spirit, this
undissembled brotherly love, cherished in their bosoms and
manifested in their conduct towards each other, which invested
the example of the primitive church with such an omnipotence of
moral power, and extorted firom the surrounding heathen them-*
selves the exclamation : ^' See how these Christians love one
another." But our object at this time is to ascertain, what
were the principal external means of manifesting and perpet-
uating this unity of spirit among the primitive christian churcnes.

I. The first means of union was entire unity of name ; that
is, the careful avoidance of all names, which implied difibrence
or division. In the apostolic age, the followers of the Redeemer
were technically called Christians, and only Christians. The
churches in different places were distinguished hy geographical
designations, and by these alone. We read of uie church at
Jerusalem, the church at Corinth, the church at Rome, etc.
but not of the Pauline or Apolline or Cepbine church, nor of
a church named after any other person but him, who bought

* Acts 4: 32. t Acts 2:46.

1838.] Dr. Sckmuekei^* Jfptd. \ 19

the church — not a part of the chuich, hut the wholt church,
with his hlood. Let it not be supposed, that this is an unim-
portant feature of christian union. Paul the apostle did not
thus regard it, when he so promptly met and repelled the at-
tempt of those at Corinth, who adopted such sectarian names,
saying << I am of Paul and I am of Apollas and I am of Cephas."
He expressly forbade their adoption of such names, declaring
that by so doing they implied, that their adopted leaders had
died for them, and that they had been baptised into their names.
The sentiments of the church, during the earlier centuries, may
be learned from the declaration of Lactantius at the commence-
ment of the fourth century : '* The Montanists, Novatians, Val-
entians— or whatever else they may call themselves, have ceas-
ed to be Christians, becanse they have renounced the name of
Christians, and called themselves by the names of men.'' (In-
stit* div. 1. IV. c. 30). This estimate of the importance of
^iinihf of namCy is doubtless overwrought ; yet the influence of
diflbrent names is far from being unimportant at present.
'^ Names are things" said that distbguished and laborious ser-
vant of Christ, the Rev. Dr. A. Green, when on assuming the
editorial chair of " The Presbyterian Magazine," he changed
its title to Christian Advocate. His reasons for this alteration
he thus assigns : ^' We usually form some judgment of a pub*
lication fiom its title ; and indeed, it is for this very purpose
that a title is given. Now on hearing of a Presbyterian Mag-
azine, some, it appears, have set it down at once as a sectarian
work, of which the main and ultimate design would be to dif-
fuse and defend the doctrines and opinions which are peculiar
to the Presbyterians, and on this account they have resolved to
give it no encouragement." What is here acknowledged of
tbe term Presbyterian, is equally true of every other sectarian
name of christian churches. Whilst it is conceded that the
substitution of geographical for sectarian names could not re-
move the whole difficulty ; it is equally certain that it would
not be without its influence. Even Celsus, the bitter foe of
Christians, when charging on them as criminal their diflferences
on nonessentials which prevailed among them in his day, was
compelled to acknowledge as one bond of union among diem,
their unity of name. Thousands of enlightened, true Christians
of different denominations differ only in name. And thousands
there are among the more ignorant, who exhibit much acerbity
against other sects and prepossesrions for their own, and yet

ISO Dr. Schmueker^i Appui. [Jam*

are ignorant of all the points of distinction between them ex*
cept the name.

The second bond of union among the primitive churches,
was unity of opinion on all fundamental doctrines^ that isy the
profession of a creed of fimdamentala. That the primitive
Christians, notwithstanding their minor difierences, did agree on
all fundamental doctrines, is evident, because they possessed
either the oral instruction of the aposdes, or the same sacred
records of them which have produced such unity in fundamen-
tals among modem Christians. It is presupi)osed by the apos*
tie's injunction ^' eamestiy to contend for the faith once delivered
to the saints ;" for, before they could ccmtend for the faith,
they must have a general understanding among them at least as
to what the fundamentals of that faith are, for they were also
commanded to abstain from '^ doubtful disputations," and not
^' to judge" their brethren for minor differences. It is finally
proved by the fact, that they required of every candidate for
baptism a profession of his creed of faith prior to the adminis*
tration of the ordinance : " Ifthoubelievesf' (said Philip to the
eunuch) ** with aU thine hearty thou mayest he baptized. And
he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of
Ood."* The custom of requiring of all applicants for baptism
a confession of their faith in the fundamentals of the gospel,
seems to have been general throughout the whole chutch.
For among the earliest documents of christian antiquity that
have reached us, there is one which by the universal testimony
of the christian fathers, is an authentic collection of the severid
points of doctrine to which this assent was required from the
days of the aposties, we mean the so called Apostles^ Creed.
This creed is highly interesting and important, especially to
modem Christians ; first, because it shows what the primitive
church universally understood the Scriptures to teach ; and
secondly, because it incontestibly establishes the Act, that the
primitive church, when guided by the. inspired apostles, and
soon after, deemed it lawful to require unanimity only in fm^
damentid doctrines in order to the unity of the church. This
creed, let it further be remembered, was the only one which
was adopted in the church of Christ until the fiwrth century, in
which the council of Nice adopted one of the same import, and
of but; littie greater length. Some small variations are found in

• Aos 8: 37. See also Rom. 13: 6. 9 Tim. 1: 14. Jude v. a

1838.] Dr. Schmueker's Appeal. 121

the earliest copies, but substantially it reads thus :* / believe in
Ood the Father Almighty, the maker of heaven and earth :

And in Jesiu Christ, his only "Son our Lord; who was conr
ceived by the Holy Ohost, bom of khe' virgin Mary, suffered
tmder Pontius Ptlate, was crucified, dead and buried. — The
third day he rose from the dead, he ascended into heaven, and
titteth on the right hand of Ood the Father Almighty, from
thence he shdii come to judge the quick and the dead.

I believe in the Holy Ohost, the holy catholic or universal
church ; the communion of saints ; the forgiveness of sins ;
the resurrection of the body, and the life everlasting.

To this, some copies add the sentence *^ descended into
hades, or the place of departed spirits ;" but it was not found in

* The earliest copies of this symbol are in the Latin language.
There are several Tarioua readings extant, which probably originated
in different Western churches, which used this symbol. We shdi
give the symbol, together with the various readings in parentheses^
so that the reader may at one glance see the whole, and also per-
ceive that even with the added variations, it was still a creed which
all orthodox Protestants can subscribe :

L Credo in (uniim) Deum, Patrem omnipotentem creatorem coeli
et terrae (**ereatorem coeli et terrae^ defuit in orient, et Rom. antiquo
symbolo : In Aquilejensi autem positum erat, ^ invisibUem et impassi-
haem."*)

'■ II. Et in Jesum Christum filium ejus unicum, Dominum nostrum,
(^^.et in unum Dominum nostrum, Jesum Christum, filium ejus tmi-
genitum/' ita addeodo et transponendo legit olim EccJesia orientalis.)
Qui coQceptus est de Spiritu sancto ; natus ex Maria vii^ine (''qui
nattts est de Spiritu sancto ex Maria virgine** communis olim lectio
erat.) Passus sub Pontio Pilato, crucifixus, mortuus et sepultus, de-
scendit ad inferna ; (** cruciiixus sub Poutio Pilato et sepultus** sim-
pliciter olim multt legebant ; Aquilejense tandem symbolum addidit
''descendit ad inferna ;" ex quo symbolo Sec. VI. Romana ecclesia
banc appendicem sue symbolo inseruit) tertia die resurrexit a mor*
tuis ; aseendit ad coelos ; sedet ad dextram Dei Patris omuipoientiB.
Inde venuiruB est judicare vivos et mortuos.

III. Credo in spihtum sanctum ('' et in spiritum sanctum" oliro)^
Sanctam (** unam" orientales addiderunt) Ecclesiam Catholioam ;
sanctorum communionem, {*^ catbolicam, ex sanctorum commnnio*
nem" ex Niceno forsan symbolo insertum, olim defuit), ^Remissionem
peccatorum ; Carnis (hvjus symb. Aquilej. addidit) resurrectionem $
et vitam aetemam. Amen, (''vitam aeternam" in plerisque olim syno-
bolis desiderabatur). See Clemm's Einleitung in die Religion und
Theologie, Vol. IV. p. 459.

Vol. XI. No. 29. 16

122 Dr. Schmucker^i Agpeid. [Jan.

the creed of the Latin churches, until the sixth century. Here
then we have the series of doctrines, the belief of which was
the bond of union in the church of Christ during three hundred
years ; and was regarded as sufficient for ecclesiastical unioD,
without any inquiry a3 to differences on minor points. All who
adopted these doctrines and adorned them by a consistent walk,
were regarded as worthy members of the one, universal church
of Christ, were every where admitted to sacramental commun-
ion by right. All professing these doctrines, and residing in
the same place, were united into one church, and worshipped
together ; and different christian churches, occupying the same
geographical ground, and distinguished iran each other by dif-
ferences concerning doctrines not contained in this creed, had
no existence in the church for several centuries : were totally
unknown during the golden age of Christianity. To this isum-
mary of doctrine some few articles were added in after ages by
different councils, to meet several fundamental heresies which
arose. But the additions are few, and generally composed
with studious brevity. In reference to these doctrines, which
he had just before expressed in bis own language, Irenaeus, a
strenuous defender of the faith against various heretics, a disci-
ple of Polycarp, the friend of the apostle John, makes the fol-
lowing remarks (which are equatty applicable to the several
orthodox Protestant churches though they are so lamentably
divided) : "This faith the church has received, and though dis-
persed over the whole world, assiduously preserves as if she in-
habited a single house ; and believes in these things as having
but one heart and one soul : and with perfect harmony pro-
claims, teaches, hands down these things, as though she had
but one mouth. For though there are various and dissimilar
languages in the world ; yet the power of the faith transmitted
is one and the same. Neither the churches in Germany, nor
in Iberiaj (Spain), nor among the Celtae (in France), nor in
the East, nor in Egypt, nor in Lybia, nor in the middle regions
of the world (Jerusalem and the adjacent dbtricts) believe or
teach any other doctrines. But as the sun b one and the same
throughout the whole ; so the preaching of the truth shines
every where, and enlightens all men, who are willing to come
to a knowledge of truth. Nor will the most powerful in speech
among the governors of the churches say any thing more than
these ; (for no one can be above his master) ; nor the most
feeble any thing less. For as there is but one &itb, he that is

1838.] Dr. Sehmucker's Apptd. 123

able to speak much cannot enlarge ; nor he who can say little
diminish it.''*

In the earlier part of the fourth century (A. D. 825) the
Nicene Creed Vas adopted in order to exclude the Arians from
the church. It is little eke than a repetition of the apostles'
creed, with several clauses referring to the error of the Arians.
The synod of Constantinople about fifty-snL years afterwards
^A. D. 381) still further enlarged this summary, by the addi-
tion of several clauses concerning the worship of the Holy
Spirit, the validity of baptism, etc. This creed as enlarged by
the synod of Constantinople, is contained in the symbols of the
lAitheran church in Europe, and also in the Prayer Book of
our Protestant Episcopal brethren in this country. It reads
thus :

'^ I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of
heaven and earth and of all things visible and invisible.

^ And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the onl^ bego^en Son of
God, begotten of his Father before all worlds ; God of God,
Light of Light, true God of the true God, begotten not made,
being of one substance with the Father, by whom all things
were made ; who for us men and for our salvation, came down
firom heaven and was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the virgin
Mary, and was made roan and was crucified also for us under
Ponthis Pilate. He suffered and was buried, and the third day
be rose again, according to the Scriptures, and ascended into
heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of the Father ; and he
shall come again with glory to judge both the quick and the
dead ; whose kingdom shall have no end.

'^ And I believe in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of
life, who proceedeth from the Father and the Son, who with
the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified^
who spake by the prophets. And I believe in one catholic
and apostolic church. I acknowledge one baptism for the re-
mission of sins ; and I look for the resurrection of the dead and
the life of the World to come.f "

a^w - I I I I I _ _ I ■ — n I ■ — ■ I I < ' 1 ~ " " — — - - - ^

* Ireaaeus adv. baereaes, L. I. c 8. p. 46. ed. Grebe : and Mason'*
Plea, p. 41.

t The foUo^og is the Greek original of the Nieene Creed, aa pre^
served in the Jlietory of Socmtes, L. I. c. 8. By a comparison of it
with the above' veraioD, the reader may distinguish the addition* made
by the council of Constantinople.

1 24 Dr. Seknwcker^s Appeal. [ J aw^

These symbols, let it be remembered, we adduce not for the
purpose of proving the doctrines contained in them, (a point
to be established only by the Scriptures) but in order to estab*
lish two facts highly important to Our inquiry, viz. 1) that the
early Christians did require assent to certain articles of christian
faith ;) and 2) that these articles to which assent was required,
were only fundamental doctrines and facts of the christian re-
ligion.

It is thus evident that unity of opinion on fundamental doc-
trines and on those ahne, constituted one of the principal bonds
of union among churches in the early ages. It is moreover
clear, as the several orthodox protestant churches of our land
cordially embrace all the doctrines enumerated by Irenaeus and
the Apostles' and the Nicene creeds, that they ought not on
the principles of primitive Christianity, to be cut up into cEfierent
sects, but should be united into one universal church. But in-,
stead of all the Protestant churches embracing one common
creed of fundamentals, and holding it up to the view of the
world as the symbol of their unity in the &ith as Christians did
in the earlier ages at every case of baptism ; the use of difierent
creeds naturally inculcates the idea of doctrinal diflbrence in*

ao^foamv noiifnip, Kjoli ck ha Kv^wp Xt^vf XQiozop^ tw vmw %ov
Stov, ysypfj&sirttt i» tov IIat(^ (ioveytini^ t ovr ianv in ttig oiauitg loii
ZToT^Of, Bbop i% Otov xat tptag ix (pmog, 0W9 aXt^^wov ix Oeov ilfi~
^irov, ytmn^^trta qv nonj&ena, 6/ioowrtow t<^ naigif d! ov to nan»
iywsto, TO Tc h toi ov^avco, xai xa h t^i pj, di ^fiag ay^^eojrovc, nat
dia tfiv fjfUTtqap atoiriQiav natfX^orta xai (ragnoi&tna na^ Bvav^Qontri"
aetrta na&orta nai ivatnarra ti} t^ati} ^/m^ot, ivBl^orta tig tovg ovQa-
9avg, iQX^l*^^ nqivtu l^tnnai %ai ytxQOvg, Kat tig to aytov itytvfia.
The above was the original form of the creed, and contains all that
catechumenB were required to repeat as their confession. The fol-
lowing clatise was however added by the Nicene fathere, and all
ministers were required also to suhecribe to it : Tovg di il<;^on«( ot»
tjv note oTi ovx ^y, tun it^fifw ytvrti&fipa$ ovx i^y, »a& ot* 4 ovar onwf
iyspBTOf t; i^ kxtqag vnwnafnag tj ownas tpaoMovitg eiva*, v; icrMFToy, ^
tQsmop, ^ alloimoif jo9 vlav tov Osov^ aya^c^oTi^M i} iyia xa^oXut^
na$ anooToXutfi t»xlfi<rw^ i. e. The holy, catholic and apostolic church
condemns (the opinion of) those who say, that there was a time when
the Son of God did not exist, and that before he was begotten he did
not exist, and that he was made out of things that w^re not, or who
•ay tliat he is of some other hypostasis or substance, or that he was
created, or that he is changeable or subject to variation. See Olemm's
Eiulaiiuog iu Religion uod Tlieologie, Vol. IV. p. 464-^.

1838.] Dr. SckfMicker's Appeal. 125

stead of unity ; and their great length, by bringing to light all
the minor differences, and ranking them indiscriminately with
the fundamentals, and making them the basis of separate
churches, inevitably must tend to throw into the shade our real
fundamental union and perpetuate the schisms in the body of
Christ.

The third bond of union among the primitiyfe Christians,
woi the mutual acknowledgement of each other* i acts of disci'-
pUne. If an individual was excommunicated or under censure
in one church, he could not obtain admission into any other.
As a security against imposition, it was customary for persons
in good standing, when travelling into strange places, to take
letters of introduction, or certificates of their good standing irom
the pastor. When any one was destitute of such certificate,
his application for church privileges was always rejected. To
these letters Paul refers, and expresses the opinion, that he
would need no such document among the Corinthians, as he
was weU known to them : ^' Need we, as some others, epistles
of commendation to you, or letters of commendation firom you ?
Ye are our epistle, written in our hearts, known and read of ail
men." * This same custom was prescribed m the church for
centuries, and numerous s}modical decrees were enacted for its
oonfinnation. In the apostolic Canons or Regulations we find
the following :

Cetnon 12. JBi tig xlrigixos i^ Xaixog wprngkaiisvog^ titov idin^
TO^, mntl^onf sig inpanolsi, dsx&fi aviv ygafAgiaswg frvataTtnotv,
iipogiC^o^w jca# o di^afitvog mm 6 db%&iig.^* t That this regu-
lation prevailed from the very days of the apostles, is highly
probable, because, as we have seen, Paul himself makes men-
tun of letters of this nature. At the oecumenical or general
council held at Nice, in the year A. D. 325, at which were
present ministers from the greater part of the christian world,
the following resolution, or canon, was adopted :

Resolution or Canon 5. In regard to those persons^ wheth"
er dergymen or laymen, who have been excommmticated by a
bishop, the existing rule is to be retained, namely, that they

• 2 Cor. 3: 1—4.

f If any excommunicated clergyman, or a layman who has hem ex-
eommunicattd, or denied admission (as member of the church), go to
another cUy and is reeeised miAout Idkrs of rscotnmendation, hath he
who receives him, and the person thus received shall he excomsMnUated.

126 Dr. Sdmucker^9 Appeal. [Jaw.

shaU not be reitored by any other than by the one toho excom-
municated them. Inquiry ought however to be instituted^
whether their expulsion from the church was not occasioned by
a contentious spirit or some other mean or hostile passion.
And in order that this may be properly done, there shall
imnually be two synods held in each provinccy and at these
meetings of the bishops^ suitable examinations shall be institu-
tedy in order that every person may see the justice of iJie ex^
communication of those who transgressed against (tbe regula-
tions of) the bishopy untU the assemblage of bislums shcMy if
they see fity pronounce a milder sentence. One of those synod-
iccu meetings shaU be held before the spring fasty the other in
thefaU.*

At the couDcH or synod of Antioch, held h A. D. 341^
sixteen years after that at Nice, a resolution of just the same
import was passed :

Resolution 6. If any person has been excommunicated by
his bishopy he shall not be restored by any one else than that
bishop himself y unless his case has been examined bythe council
or synody and a milder sentence been obtained. This regular-
tion shall be applicable aUJce to laymeny presbyters y deaconsy
and all the clergy. f

From these testimonies it is abundantly evident, that the
churches in the earlier centuries fully acknowledged the disci-
plinarian acts of each other : nor is it difficult to perceive the
salutary influence which would result from such mutual marks
of confidence. Carried to a reasonable extent, they would give
an efficacy to church discipline, which it has almost entirely
lost in moidem times. This regulation would cherish brotheriy
love between the churches, and tend to give visibility to their
union.

The fourth bond of union am/ong the primitive Christians
was sacramental and ministerial communion. This feature is
one of very extensive application and most salutaiy influence
on the diffirent portions of the christian church. The apostle
Paul may be regarded as inculcating it in his declaration to the
Christians at Corinth ; " For we being many, are one bread and
one body (that is, you at Corinth, I and my fellow-Christians
here at Epbesus, fccm the midst of whom I am addressing you,

• Fueh*8 Bibliothek der KirebenvenammlangeD, Vol. 1. p. 304.
t Ibid. Vol II. p. 63.

1888.] Dr. Sekmdcei^B J^pptaL tS7

one body) ; fwr tire art aU partakers of that one breadJ^^
AccordiDgly we find, that id the earliest period to which the
records of christian antiquity extend, every church received to
communion as fully as its own members, the members and min-
isters of every other acknowledged christian church on earth,
upon evidence of their good standing. Strangers coming fjx>m
other churches were required to present letters or certificates of
their standing ; and aU Christians, whether clergy or laymen,
regarded it as a duty to commune with the members of any
other church, at which they happened to be present. It was a
common custom for Christians in the earlier centuries, when
travelling, to take such certificates of membership with them ;
and when stopping in a city or town, they sought out the
Christians living in it, and received from them every mark of
attention and friendship. These letters were termed literae
formatae or fga/iftaia nrvnoiftiva, as they were of a particular
form to prevent counterfeits ; they were sometimes denominat-
ed epistola^ conmunicatoriaef or ygciftfiata xoipmp$xa, letters of
ecclesiastical communion or fellowship.f

The broad principle of scriptural christian commtmion extends
indiscriminately to aU whom we regard as true disciples of
Christ. Thus it is laid down bv Peter in hb vindication, when
censured for communing with Gentile converts : ^^ thou wentest
in to men unciicumcised and didst eat with them.'' % Hb ar-
gument is thus summed up, after he had detailed the &cts on
which it rested ; " Foramuch as Ood gave them the like gifty
OB he did unto us, who believed on the hord Jems Christ;
what was /, that 1 could withstand Ood 7"

It is eqwdiy certain that ministerial communion and (^cial
acknowledgement pervaded the church in her primitive ag6s.
The regulations made by dififerent synods or councils to prevent
the abuse of this privilege incontestibly establish its existence.
But even in the apostolic canons we find the following :

Canon 32. Mtidsva xcop iiPOfv iniaKonmv n ngsafivjigstp i]
iuKtoptov ipsv avorattKwp ngoadix^a&su ' xo« iTUiptgofASpmv
avxutp ipttTtgipeo^moop ' uus iqfiiv tiai KtjgvxiQ tfjg ivaefiiMQ
ngoo8€xsa0WBa» ' si de ftn/ft rrip xgsMnf avtoK ^nsxogtipioscpssg,

•1 Cor. 10: 17.

t Neander's Allgemeine Geachicbta der Chriatlicben ReligioD nod
Kirche, Vol. I. p. 390.

t AetB 19: 8> 17.

128 Dr. SAmucker^s Appeal. [Jan.

iig KOiwwpiav avtovg ^ij ngoaiiiiQ^i * nolla ytxg ««ra ovvap-
•naytip y*wr«*.*

At the synod of Carthage, held A. D. 348 or 349, it was
resolFed that '^ no one shall receive a minister without letters
from his bishop.^'f

If furnished with suitable testimonials a minister in one part
of the church was acknowledged as such in every other, and if
present at public worship was ordinarily invited to take part in
conducting the services.

The tendency which such free sacramental intercommunion
as opportunity olSers with all over the whole earth who present
credible evidence of genuine discipleship, cannot readily be cal-
culated. The views and principles and feelings which it pre-
supposes, constitute important elements of the millennial union of
the future church. God grant their speedy disseminauon over
th^ church universal I

The Jifth means by which unity was promoted and preserv-
ed among the primitive Christians, was occasional epistolary
communication* Of this fact we have abundant proof in the
epistles of Clement, Polycarp, Ignatius and Barnabas, who are
termed apostolic fathers, because they lived partly in the apos-
tolic age. Some of these epistles are doubtless spurious and all
corrupted, yet enough remains to answer the purpose for which
we adduce them to show that they were letters written to dif-
ferent churches to promote doctrinal and ecclesiastical umaa
among them. The age immediately subsequent to the apos-
tles furnishes numerous instances of such epistolary commnnioo
of the churches. From Eusebius we learn that Dionysius of
Corinth about the year A. D. 160, sent abroad numerous epis-
tles of this kind. " And first (says Eusebius^) we must speak

■ ■ ■ - —I— ■— I— ■■ ■ . — ^ ■ -^ ■■ ■ . — . .- — ■ ■■* ^ ■■—■■■ ■— Mil ■ , Ml^— ^— I ■ ^

* " Let DO one receive strange (foreign) bishops or presbyters or
<1eacon8 without letters of recommendation ; and the letters that are
brought must be examined. If thej^ prove to be pious preachers
(preabhera of piety) let them be received : but if they do not ; their
immediate necessities should be supplied, but they must not be re-
ceived into communion. For many instances of fraud have occurred
in this matter." Koepler's Bihliotbek der Kirehenv&ter, Vol. IV. p.
340.

t Fuch's Bihliotbek der Kirchenversammlungen, Vol. III. p. 85.

* Eusebius, IV. cb. 93. Kal nqAtw yt ntnl Jiwvalov <pettiw '
ou T« trig h Koqiv^^ naqoudag top xr^q inumomig ijmtxdoiOTO &^ifw^,
lisii ig trjg h&iov tpd^onopiag ov fkipop tdig wi ovsor, OM ^dfi mi) tdig

1888.] Dr. Schmucke^s Jlgpeal. 129

of Dkmysius, who was appobted over the church at Corinth,
and imparted freely not only to his own people, but to others
abroad also, the blessings of bis divine labors. But he was most
useful to all in the general epistles which he addressed to the
churches. One of them is addressed to the Lacedaemonians,
and contains instmctians in the true religumy and inculcates
peace and unity : one also to the Athenians, exciting them to
the faith and the life prescribed by the gospel, from which he
shows that they had swerved, so that they had nearly fallen
from the truth since the martyrdom of Publius, their leader
(bishop) which happened in the persecutions of those times.
The necessity of such letters as means of christian instruction,
is at present superseded by the universal dissemination of the
holy Scriptures ; yet as bonds of christian union, they may still
be occasionally resorted to with the happiest results, especially
between Christians of distant countries as a substitute for per-
sonal intercourse. We cannot but commend the epistle of the
.venerable Dr. Planck of Germany, to the General Synod of the
Lutheran Church in this country, as also the epistles of the
Congr^tional and Presbyterian churches of the United States
to the Christians of the same denomination in Europe. Still,
all these epistles bear on their front the badge of schism ; for
they were addressed by particular sects of Christians, not to
Christians of another country generally, but only to Christians
of the same sect. They are epistles from followers of Paul and
ApoUos in one land, to disciples of the same leaders in another.
So completely has sectarianism separated the several denomina-
tions, that by many it is regarded as immodest to address any
others than those of our own sect. Instead of that community
of interest between all the members of Christ's body, which the
apostle inculcates, " so that all the members should have the
same care one for another, and whether one member suflfer, all
the memben safkt with it ;"* sectarianism has taught each

isii T^( idXodoTt^g iip&iwmg itUMHim^* ^ifff^ifktnviw anwrn kavthip
Ma&laia^ h (dg tmnvnomo MiMUiMiTf nffog jog ixxXfialag inunokalg *
MV imuf, 1} /i<r n^g Jmudatfiowl&iig^ l^odo^iag nojfix^xiani, ii^iPfig n
9ud hmrimg vno&niK^ ' ^ dk n^og A&riPalovg, duyiifrim} marioig »al
t^g Ktnito tvayvtllop noXnaiag * ijc ohyvt^fiaartag iUyx^ ^ i^ fun^
ffov dttp inatnartag tov loyov, i^ ovni^ tor nqotat&xct ovrinf ZTov-
ftJUaw (MO^riv^iprM Mtra fovg fota avytfiii duityfuAg,

• 1 Cor. 12: 86.

Vol. XL No. 29. 17

130 Dr. SchmucJcer^s Appeal. [J Air*

member of the body to stand aloof from the others, has taught
them by no means to " have the same care one for another ! !"

The last bond of primitive union was the occasional consuha^
tion of different churches by representatives convened in a coun'
cil or synod. This means of prolonging unity among Christians
was for several reasons not very frequently resorted to in the
apostolic age. The continual journies of the apostles tended
in a measure to answer the same purpose. How often coun-
cils for mutual consultation were held, prior to that at Rome,
mentioned by Eusebius, we know not ; but the principle being
sanctioned by the apostolic example, Acts xv., the church
should apply it just as extensively as is found to promote the
spirit of union, brotherly love and order among Christians. As
however neither Christ nor his apostles have appointed such
bodies as courts of judicature or appeal; it is probable, that
whatever business ot this kind is referred to the more extensive
judicatories, their decisions should be regarded mainly as advi-
sory, and should have no other force than results from the evi-
dence alleged in support of the opinion given. The danger
of such General Synods, Assemblies, or Conventions, arises not
so much from the number of churches represented in them,
as from the great number of the delegates, from the degree of
power conferred on them by the elementary members of Christ's
Dodv, the individual churches ; and from the amount of actual
business which is transferred from the churches in their ehmer^
tary capacity , to these judicatories. If the delegation be small,
so that the whole body will not be unwieldly ; if the business
transacted be not such as properly belongs to the individual
churches ; if it relate only to the general interests of the church ;
and if the powers of the body be only advisory ; this principle
of mutual consultation might to a certain extent be safely em-
ployed.

In view of these facts and principles, the writer regarded
with high approbation the proposition for a re-organization of
the General Assembly of the rresbyterian Church by making
it an Advisory Council. Tliat measure, which was proposed
io the Biblical Repertory of 1832, was by uncontradicted fame
attributed to the Rev. Dr. Alexander, and contains a distinguish-
ed specimen of practical wisdom, and enlarged views of the
principles of our holy religion, in their application to ecclesias-
tical jurisprudence. On precisely the same general principles,
the General Synod of the Lutheran Church in this country was

1838.] Hebrew Tcnees, 131

fiwnded seventeen years ago, and of its salutary and safe prac-
dcal operation, scarcely a dissenting voice is heard among the
enlightened friends of evangelical piety among us.

We have thus endeavored faithfully to exhibit the features
which constituted the unity of the primitive church. Let us
DOW pursue the subject further, deduce the principles furnished
by these facts, and finally develope a plan to restore the unity
of the body of Christ on the same apostolic principles, which
constituted it in the primitive ages ; a consummation which
ought to be devoutly wished for by every disciple of that Sav-
iour who so earnestly prayed for the union of his followers ;
an object so dear to the heart of the nobleminded Calvin, that
to accomplbh it he savs : ^^ As to tmyselff were I likely to be
of any Mervice, I would not hesitate^ were it necessary , for auck
a purpose, to cross ten seas^' (Quantum ad me attmet, siquis
mei usus fore videbitur, ne decern quidem maria, si opus sit, ob
earn rem trajicere pigeat. Calvin's Epist. p. 61).

ARTICLE VII.
The Hebrew Tenses.

TVmulalioo of EwaJd't Byniax, ia the teeood Q^brUgad) •ditioo of hi* H«braw Graanar»
■o far u it retpeeta the ute of the Tansss in Hebrew, with remarks on tbe same, by M.
flciuttt, of tlM Tbool. Seminaryi Andovor.

[The apparently unlimited metes and bounds of tbe Hebrew
tenses, as employed in the Old Testament Scriptures, have
given rise to many curious, and to some not uninteresting theo-
ries, in relation to this subject. Long has this usace been the
stumbling-block of grammarians, and particularly of those who
were inclined to maintain, that every thing in language is man-
aged with tbe most perfect regularity and uniformity* That
the Future tense in Hebrew should ever be employed as the
common historic Aorist in narrations of events that occurred in
past time, while the Praeterite has far more than an equal share
in designating things yet to come, is a phenomenon which at
least is singular in many respects, and which would (as it has
actually done) naturally give rise to many and diverse theories
and conjectures.

132 Hebrew Ttmts. [Jak.

It is not my present purpose to enter into the history or the
examination of these at large. It would require somewhat of a
volume for either ; and my apprehension is, that such a volume
would not find a very numerous class of readers ; certainly not
in our country. Most of the theories which have been broach-
ed, have indeed been ephemeral. They have appeared and
disappeared with the authors of their existence. And one good
reason for this has been, that most of the authors of such theo-
ries have been men of very limited acquisitions in the Hebrew
lan^age, and therefore could not have much weight in the scale
of Hebrew literature, nor extend their influence very (ar.

At present, however, we find the matter in circumstances
which are quite different. Ewald is unquesUonably among the
first Hebrew scholars Yiow upon the stage of action. He has
great talents for linguistic acquisition ; nor is he by any means
wanting in the power of philosophical speculation on the nature
and attributes of language. That he b iinee fiK>m all embarass-
ments on the ground of precedents^ is sufficiently manifest, in
every step of his progress, to please die most independent class
of critics, who hold least of all to authority in these matters.
In my own view, this independency is excessive in Ewald. It
seems to me to have become even a morbid feeling, and to
have urged him on to make the diftreaee* between himself and
other grammarians as numerous and as large as possible.

On no subject, perhaps, has he gained more reputation for
liimselA than in the department of Hebrew Syntax. It has be-
come fashionable among one class of Hebrew critics in Ger-
many, to appeal almost exclusively to Cwald as authority ; and
seldom do they mention other grammarians, unless it be in the
way of a sneer, or in order to show some kind of contempt for
them. One would think, from the tenor of what is said by
them in relation to this subject, that all other Hebrew philolo-
gists now on the stage had already outlived their fame and
their usefuhiess.

Having recently been engaged in publishing a new edition of
my Hebrew Grammar, I went through a review of the Syntax
in as thorough a manner as the haste with which it was printed
permitted me to do. One duty which I prescribed to myself
was, to read and compare Ewald's Syntax ; specially that of the
abridged edition of his Grammar, which contains a more orderly
digest than the first edition, and thoughts more matured. In
making this comparison I was much struck with that part of

1838.] Hebrew Tenses. 133

his Syntax which has respect to the use of the Hebrew tenses.
When I had completed my grammatical labour^ and finished
the printing of my book^ I felt a strong desire to re-examine
(more at lebure) the theory of Ewald on the subject of the He-
brew tenses. This I have done, and the following translation,
with the remarks which are appended, is the result of my re-
examination. I give them to the public, because the subject is
one of deep interest to every student of Hebrew grammar, and
of much importance, to say the least, to Hebrew philology and
criticism.

In introducing Prof. Ewald to speak for himself, I hope that
I shall avoid the imputation of having misconstrued or misre-

r resented htm. At least this cannot be charged upon me, imleas
have purposely mistranslated him. This I have not dooe ; but I
cannot assure tne reader, that I have always translated him with
correctness. I can truly say, that I have done my best to ac-
complish this ; but, I must add, that after being for a quarter of
a century somewhat acquainted with the (Serroan hnguage, and
after having read more in it, during that period of time, than I
have in my mother-tongue, I am still unable in some cases to
find out the meaning of Prof. Ewald to my satisfaction. I can
only say, now and then, as Castalio says in his apologetic note
for a version of a passage more literal than be was accustomed
to make : ^* This 1 have translated literally, because I do not
understand it." Perhaps as to one or two passages in Ewald,
some one who can better strip ofif the Vmkidluiw which this
celebrated writer throws over all his speculations than I can do,
might feel disposed to question, whether I had gone so &r as
to give even a Uteral version. Be it so then ; ' Si quis prospi-
ciat — vaticinetur.' He shall do so at least with my liberty, and
I will make — not my palinode^ for that would imply that I
had consciously done wrong, or at least through negligence —
but, my acknowledgements that there are depths in Ewald, down
into whfeh I have not had address or skill or strength enough to
plunge.

But some things which I think I do understand,! have called
in question. Ewald's views and mine, therefore, are both be-
fore the reader ; and he has the opportunity of judging for him-
self. This is all that justice and candour can demand ; and in
the doing of this, I am satisfied that I have done my duty fairly.
— M. S.]

184 Hebrew Teneee. [Jan.

Syntax or the' Verb, by Prof. Ewald.

^ 470. Five forms of the Hebrew verb serve to designate
time or tense ; viz. the two Modes [Praeter and Future tense],*"
which at the same time also mark the distinction of Mode ; the
same two Modes with Vav relative or conversive prefixed ; and
the Participle. The Hebrew employs these forms, not ac-
cording to tne method of distingubhins tenses in our languages,
^to the spirit of which it is quite foreign), but still with a dis-
tinction so definite that they cannot be exchanged for each
other, while they plainly mark the principal difference of the
tenses.

[A]

■

^ 471. The two Modes [Praeter and Future], c(xi»dered
merely ia respect to their use as tenses, represent all action
aoristicaUyf i. e. without reference to any other action or time.
They differ firom each other in such a way, that the first Mode
marks that which is comj^leted, definite^ and certain ; the
second Mode that which is not completed^ indefinite^ and de*
pendent on circmutances. Consequently they do not m them-
selves mark a time which is definite, but are capable of being
applied to any portion of time, provided that the leading idea
designated by them be retained.

^ 473. Hence the first Mode [Praeter] is employed,
(1) To designate the past, when an action that has once taken
place is simply presented, without any reference to any thing
else ; e. g. ^ God iM*^ , created the world ;' tY^,9 nz] » what hoit
thou done 7

(2) To designate the present ; (a) When any particular ac«
tion which has once taken place, may be again repeated ; e* g.
n^im y^ta ricn, the wicked man despises Jehovah^ Ps. 10: 3.
(b) Vvhen a state or condition began m some undefined past
time, and one still sees the completion of it, [i. e. one sees that
the same state or condition is still continued] ; e. g. ^X ' ^
know; ^ri*]5T, J remember, Num. 11: 5; anfij, he loves ; ^l^f
he hates ; 12t» , he refuses, Ex. 10: 3 ; DN2J , he despises. Of
course such a meaning [i. e. that of the present tense] is fire-
quent in [the first mode of] intransitive Verbs. Different fixHn

* The passages included in brackets, I have added for the sake of
explanation. M. S.

1838.] Hebrew Tenm. 136

this are rarious methods of designating the Present^ as described
in ^ 473, 2. ^ 483.

(3^ To designate the future. This canhappen, only when
the tning to be done is, in the mind of the speaker, already re-
garded as being mrtuaUy completed, and consequently as tin*
conditumal and certain, (as in German the Present is often put
fer the Future) ; e. g. frequently in the declarations of the
Divine Being, as "^nns , IwUl constitute, Gen. 17: 20. In the
poets and prophets is the same usage, even in other parts of
discourse, although this is not frequent ; e. g. VX^Vt , they shall
perish, Ps. 10: 16. Mic. 1: 11.

^ 473. The Second Mode [Future] has a very extensive
use.

(1) In accordance with the idea it designates of a thing Tiot
yet accomplished and indefinite, it is employed, (a) To express
a thing simply future ; e. g. n^n*;, he will be, . (6) To de-
signate z future in time which is already past, when the con-
text has reference in general to a time past ; in which case the
idea of that which is past lies merely in the connection ; e. g»
the first born Tjbtti *itj;n , who shotUd reign [qui regnaturus
crat] in his stead.* (c) For the Futurum praeteritttm in de-
pendent clauses ; e. g. nsfi*'' ■»3 a^'izn, could we have known
that he wtmld say J (Like nafi<'» "^ w^i; , / knew that he
would say), Gen. 43: 7, 26.

(3) Out of the idea of that which is incomplete flows the
idea of becoming, of origijiation, of taking rise. Hence^
(a) The second Mode designates an action not yet completed,
but which is being completed or finished ; (we designate this
by the Present). E. g. * Why are ye coming out,^ *1*3EI3, 1 Sam.
17: 8. In this sense the second Mode comes near to occupy-
ing the same ground with the first, which sometimes designates
the Present. There is still, however, this distinction, that the
first Mode speaks of a thing as already completed, and the
second of that which is becoming completed ; e. g. nat^ y^nvq ^
whence art thou come 7 [as having already arrived] ; and ^'•fiJJj
Han, whence dost thou come 7 [the action not being yet com-
plete]. It should be noted, however, that the first Mode is
not oilen employed in this way.

(b) The second Mode also designates an origination or &e-
coming so and so in time past, [i. e. a thing once present and
becoming completed in time that is past]. The poets use this
form fi^quently, (I) In order to transfer an action to the time

136 Hebrew Tenses. [Jav.

of its rise or origination,, when it was present ; (like the Latin
Imperfect) ; as *i^^Pi TK, then ihou wast bam^ Job 38: 21. See
also Job 3: 3, 11. 15: 7. (2) When in vivid narration they
transfer past things to the present ; as ^ZTJ^lt he conducts me,
Num. 23: 7. In prose the first of these two usages sometimes
may be found ; as 9n: , we were hnowing^ Gen. 43: 7. Often,
moreover, the second Mode stands connected in such cases
with TM then; as n*ns^ TM, then sang he, Ei^. 15: 1. Jos. 8: 30.
(c^ In particular, the idea of an action often repeated or
continued, flows out of the preceding view of the second Mode ;
for every action of this kind can be regarded as still continuing
and yet to be renewed. So for the Present, •^5»; , dicUur,
dicunt ; specially in comparisons, as fitlq^ *^^9,?' ^ <^ne is wont
to uphold, Deut. 1: 31. So also for the Past, the idea of which
flows merely out of the connection of the views of the speaker;
as n3\c2 rT3'<fj 71^9'' , he was vfont to do yearly, 1 Sam. 1: 7.
2: 19.' '

(3) From the meaning comprised in the second Mode arises
further the idea of that which is indefinite, or dependent on
circumstances Of feelings ; so that it answers to express the
Subjunctive ; e. g. :ipfi{ 7V2, how cem 1 curse 1 Num. 23: 8.
Even the Subjunctive past is expressed by it ; as ^n^Tb^^l, ^^
i ^n^ht have sent thee away, Gen. .31: 27.

This mode is also employed in quoting the thoughts of ano-
ther, and stands, (a) In mdirect quotation ; as ]i:}<iu$'^ r& nQM ,
he commands thai they shall return. Job 36: 10. So ^"VfiZ • • •
19*3 f ^i^ he gatve order . . . that they should stand, Dan.
1: 5. This method of speaking, however, is not firequent, as
the general spirit of simple syntax would naturally lead us to
suppose. (6) The second Mode is employed in uttering direct
commands or uncondirional wishes ; e. g. b^fi^D, thou shah eat.
Gen. 2: 16. \^9l fi6 , wAicA should not be done. Gen. 20: 9.
84: 7. Lev. 7: 2.' So respecting the Past ; as ^yxr^, I would
have died. Job 3: 11. 3: 16. 10: 18, 19.

(4) More expressly still to designate this idea of command
and wish, an abndged form of the second Mode arose, viz* the
Jussive and bfiperative ; and still more expressly to render the
wish or command emphatic, the paragogic n^ is appended to
the Imperative. See 4 240—243.

^474. According to these leading distinctions of meaning
are the two Modes employed in a variety of ways with partis
cks ; of these I shall treat particularly in the sequel.

1888.] Htbnvf Ten$u. 131

[B]

0/ the tUH> modes toith Vav RVLATms or cowr^vtswn, the

two relative historic forms,

^ 475. From the simple copulative i (and) we must care*
fully separate the more expressive particle which connects sen*
tencesy and which at the same Ume includes m itself the idea
of time or a sequency of ideas ; and answers, therefore, to the
German und danriy und so^ dann^ so, so dassy [and then^ and
sOf thefiy sOy so that]* The idea of advajice in respect to time
is transferred to a sequency of thought. This Vav stands only
in the beginning of a sentence, which holds such a relation to a
preceding one ; as that in the junction of them a sequency of
time or of thought is expressed. Thence the Vav mserted
here may most appropriately be named Vav relative. This
more significant Vav is also designated by a different mode of
pronouncing it. In the fiill form in which it is commonly as-

sociated with the second Mode, it sounds * 1 (vay) and [frequent-

a] it alters the tone [or place of accent]. Before the first
ode, (and elsewhere, ^ 591), it is sounded as is the simple

copula (i), but it also [oftentimes] changes the tone, when
placed before the first Mode, ^ 245. Thence both the Vav
relauve and the Mode of the verb are so inseparably connected,
that they cannot be dissevered without entirely losing their
force ; and so too that the more intimate connection, such as
M;i and he comesy is directly the opposite of the looser con-
nection, tta . . . 1 and he came^ ^ 478.

Vav relative with the second Mode.

^ 476. (1) When Vav relative is placed before the second
Mode, it involves in thb continuaUy the idea of hecomif^y of
taking risey or originating; this union [o(\ with the Future]
represents the sequency of the new becoming [of a thing, or]
onginating of an action out of something which precedes. Con-
sequently, (a) Sbce this Vav marks sequency of timcy it is most
fi^quently employed to designate an action once done, but so
that the first Mode stands as a correlative with it in a simple
aoristic sense, e. g. ^n**^). n73M, he spake and. then it was, or and
so it wasy it began to ie, it became ; noiDn^ V^^rif ^^^ sawest
and then thou didst rejoice, or and so thou didst r^oice. And
in this way is Vav relative constantly employed in the narration

Vol. XI. No. 29. 18

138 HOrtw Tenses. [Jau.

of things that have already taken place, inasmuch as it contin-
ues the new development and unfolding of the several succes-
sions of events according to their natural sequences ; and this
Vav relative is constantly continued, except where difficulties
(^ 478) are interposed.

More un frequently, and almost within the same limits as the
first Mode, when used as an Aorist (^ ^'7^)> ^^^^ ^^^ ^^''"^ ^
employed to designate the Present and the Future; e. g. Gen.
19 : 9. Nah. 1 : 4. Amos 9 : 6. Mic. 2 : 13. But this is made
clear merely by the connection of the discourse. Possibly a
second Mode may in this way precede an Aorist.

(2) The same period of time [^Ae past] can the second Mode
designate, when it is employed to mark the sequency of thought ;
e. g. in making deductions or conclusions from that which pre-
cedes, as Cjj'l, and so it continued^ Gen. 23 : 30. When thb
Mode is employed (as it is), in completing what is necessary
after a protasis of a sentence, n corresponds well to so, so that ;
e. g. * What is man «i ny*3nn , that thou takest cognizance of him P
Ps. 144: 3. Is. 51 : 12, 13. 1 Sam. 15 : 23. It is also era-
ployed, when (after one or more words inserted which break
in upon the tenor of the discourse) the writer returns again
and resumes that tenor ; e. g. ^ and as to his concubine (and her
name was Rumah,) fitv: DA 1^133, even she also hore children,^
Gen. 22 : 24.

^ 477. This second species of Vav relative, also, as well as
the first, must be preceded by some sentence or proposition, to
which the sequency or succession of time has a relation or ref>
erence. No book, nor discourse, nor separate narration, can be-
gin with such a second Mode. (Respecting ^n^J see ^ 479).
The form, however, [of that which precedes] is altogether a
matter of indifference, if there only remains the idea of a
Vav relative ; for any kind of verbal form may precede this, or
a sentiment without a verb, or an abrupt clause. A verb or a
sentence ma^ also precede this Vav relative which marks se^
quency of time^ whose own appropriate time is quite different ;
e. g. < This man has come here as a stranger, ^B*>£j*.l9 and now
he vnll be acting the part of a judge,' Gen. 19: 9. 2 Sam. 3:
8. With particular frequency is this second Mode with Vav
employed in the sense of No. 1 above, after words expressing
limitation of time, and when this limitation (which fdrms a kind
of abrupt clause thrown in) precedes the verb with 1 ; e. g.
»^*l ''^^bj^n Di^^a, on the third day then lifted he up. Gen.
22:4.

1638.] Hebrew Tentee. 139

^ 478. The reasons which ma^ prevent the employment of
Vav relative [with the second Mode] in continued discourse,
may be partly in the meaning, and partly in the^brm of the dis-
course. Is an Aorist to be employed, then the Jirst Mode,
according to common custom, is to be used in describing an ac-
tion absolutely and simply past. Vav relative with the second
Mode is therefore superseded, on account of the meanings

(1) When propositions are introduced which involve no se^
jiiency of time or of meaning — when there is a Btandstill in the
narration. For example, (a) When the foregoing verb is sim-
ply explained by a new one, without any intervening particle,
so that the same action is a second time virtually described ; as
^Dbn . . . iTa*!?^! , then went they straight onwards — they trav^
ettedy 1 Sam. 6: 12. Gen. 21: 14. [Here the second verb is
PraeteTy therefore, instead of Future], (h) When an explan-
atory clause is thrown in (with the verb following its subject)
by an insertion before it of i simply copulative, in which case
the participle may be employed to mark continued action
(^ 484) and the first Mode [Praeter] to designate momentary
actions; e. g. ash bifit'iDi-nQi^^i , then he said — and Saul
thought, i. e. Saul said and thought). Seldom is the first Mode
employed immediately after the copula i [in such cases], in a
mere additional explanation of a preceding clause, without any
advance in the time or in the narration, as in Gen. 21: 25. 28:
6 ; in mere synonymes, however, this is frequent, (c) When
any inserted clause interrupting the main discourse is thrown
in, which begins with another particle, viz. ^i&M , ^ , etc. ; by
reason of which a sentence in reality new commences, so far as
sequency of time is concerned, and in which Vav relative with
the second Mode can no more stand, than in the beginning of
a discourse, chapter, etc. (^ 477) ; e. g. !intt» ^3 l«"jjl, then
feared thy, for they said, etc., 1 Sam. 4 : 7. The momen-
tary actions which the first Mode designates, while standing in
subordinate clauses with i or other particles, commonly are
such as relate to an earlier period than that in the main narra-
tive (the Pluperfect) ; which, however, is disclosed only by
the nature of the case and the comparison of actions, etc. The
language has no appropriate form for the Pluperfect, and em-
ploys the first Mode to designate it, as the Greeks do th6 Aor-
ists; e. g. ^ They buried Absalom, n^bfiibicraeti, now Absa-
lom had taken, etc.,' 2 Sam. 18: 18; '< The 'place "TDV "i^^^
where he had stood,* Gen. 19 : 27.

140 Hebrew Tenses. [Jah.

(2) Vav relative with tbe second Mode cannot be employed
by reason of tbe ybrm, when a word must stand before the verb.
The proper meaning of this form [Vav relative with 2nd Mode]
can be designated only when the connection is appropriate ; so
that the verb cannot be in this Mode unless it stands with a 1 in
its full significance at the beginning of a clause. If a word ne-
cessarily stands before such a verb with i j then this i becomes
a simple Vav capulativey and the Future becomes a simple
Aorist, as in the beginning of a discourse, without any intimate
connection with the preceding clause.

(3) The second Mode with Vav relative cannot stand be-
fore a clause, (a) Which begins with M^ , inasmuch as this
must always precede the verb ; e. g. nrjfij tib\ *M^t^l , then he
commanded^ out he wauid not. (b) When one or more words,
on account of their importance or in the way of antithesis are
set before the verb, it takes the first Mode : as ' then called he
tbe dry land earth, but the collection of the waters he called
seas, «"3i;"''"«"3R!3 , Gen. 1: 10.

^ 479. When one or more words, which of themselves make
a short sentence or even one of considerable extent, are insert-
ed before a verb which in itself might be joined with Vav rela-
tive after a train of thought, it frequently happens, that instead
of the mere copula 1 [which in such a case might be expected
according to the principles above developed], the formula "^ri^i ,
and then it was or happened, is employed [before such inserted
words] ; and thus the force of the relation is preserved in such
a way, that after this either Vav relative may follow, when
some consequence is deduced in the next clause out of the pre-
viously inserted clause, or (with less strict limitation) the Aorist.
This last is more usually made by the Praeter with Vav pre-
fixed, ^481.

The formula ''n^jj. is made use of most commonly, (I) Be-
fore some limitation of time expressed or implied, (a) Before
some definite expression of a limitation ; as yq, ^nhM '^H'^i , and
it came to pass after such things, (b) Before an implied lim-
itation ; as Stk^o "^n^ji. , and it came to pass as he was comiw,
Judg. 3: 26 ; njhri'iaa wn •'n-jT., and tt came to pass while he
was bowing himself,' h. 37: 38*.'"

(2) Less frequent is the use of ''51?? before other kinds of
words, pardcularly when they do not intimate any thing but an
obscure or very distant limitation of time ; as D'»*nMib3n "^n^l
'•^IStl* ^^ ^ ^^^ to pass — the remnant — they even dispersed.

1638.] Hebrew Temee. 141

1 Sam. II: 11. 10: 11. Is. 92: 7. Onlj the late Hebrew
writers put Wn\t the beginning of a book.

Vav relative with thefint Mode.

^ 480. The fiist mode [Praeter] with Vav relative is em-
pk^ed when the idea is designated of an action which is cer-
tain, and (if it is still to be done) so good as already completed,
(^ 472). In this capacity it may answer to our Present. It
is so employed, that the second Mode (used as an Aorist) must
precede it, or at least must be implied m case the idea of rela-
tion falls away [?] ; so that, since Vav relative of the second
Mode [Future] is usually employed as a correlative to the first
Mode, there arises, by such a usage, the most complete distinc-
tion of both Aorists and relative forms of tense. Hence this
Vav relative of the first Mode is found exactly in all cases where
the second Mode as Aorist is employed, ^ 473.* Consequently,

(1) In a description of the future ; where it is the more da/i-
nite form, when compared with the Vav relative and second
Mode ; as fitibsi ^\2 » he will go and then fight. It is not
necessary, however, [to the employment of the first Mode with
1 relative], that the future should be spoken of in the preceding
clause, or that the second Mode should stand m it. Any form
of the verb may precede, or a clause without a verb, and a con-
clusion may be drawn relative to the future from the present ;

as ' There is no fear of God here, ^y^^Xl » ^^ ^^ 0* ^' ^'^^^
this is so) they will kill me^ Gen. 20: 11. So, too, a conclu-
sion from the past may be drawn ; e. g. ' This hath touched
thy lipsy and so thy sin wUl depart^ noi . . . 9J3 , Is. 6: 7.

(2) Vav relative with the first Mcxle is employed for the
Present^ and is particularly frequent in respect to actions repeat-
ed or continuing ; as ' he fiees before the lion and faUs upon
the bear,' :^a©i . . . D»r , Amos 5: 19. Nah. 3: 12. Jpb 7: 4

i where the proper alteration of tone is wanting). Hence this
orm is iirequent in describing actions of the pasty which are
continued or often repeated. Indeed this is one of the princi-
pal uses of this form, and separates it sufficiently firom the sec-
ond Mode as described in ^ 476 ; e. g. * A mist ^JJJttJrn n^y;

* I have translaled this as literally as I oould ; I do not profeas to
ondentand it. M. S.

143 Hebrew Temet. [Jam.

ascended (was continually going up) and then U watered die
earth,*

Everyjform of the verb may also precede this use of the first
Mode ; so that not only the second Mode, but the participle
when it marks a state or condition during which something else
was done or was in a particular state (^ 484), and then this,
with the particular things involved in it, is further described ;
as in Gen. 2: 10. 37: 7. Jos. 6: 13. Is. 6: 3, 8. 1 Sam. 17: 20.
So too the second Mode with Vav relative may precede, inas-
much as the description of things past often includes the idea of
things frequently repeated, or in some particular cases even ren-
ders prominent the idea of repetition ; as in 1 Sam. 1: 3. 7: 15.
16: 23. Gen. 80: 41, 42. 38: 9. The later writers, however,
began to commingle this form with the second Mode, when the
discourse related to the past ; see Gen. 87: 7. Ruth 4: 7. Job
1: 4, 5.t

(3) This relative first Mode follows the second Mode when
it stands in the sense of the C^unctive, and thus employed it
describes merely the necessary and certain consequences of the
first action ; as ^"STti H^'^ti , that he may not come and then
smite me, Gen. 32: 12. Consequently this form may be em-
ployed,

(4) After the Imperative and Jussive, when the force of the
command ceases, and the subsequent description merely relates
what followed as a consequence ; as in*i3j3^ la 9dD , smite Am,
and then do thou bury him ; rin»Nn "^3? , speaky so that thou
shah sayj 1 K. 2: 31. Lev. 1:'2.' 'Gen" 41 : 34—36. But if
the force of the command or wish still continues, the Jussive or
Imperative form is also continued, and this either with or with*
out Md- .

^481. Finally the first relative Mode is altogether like the
second Mode, in several respects as it regards external signifi-
cancy or position.

(1) It cannot stand in the beginning of a sentence or clause ;
but still it is indifferent what the form of the preceding verb or
clause may be (comp. <^ 477). An unfinished clause may pre-
cede, from which a deduction is made by the verb in the rela«

* But here the Future indicates action just as often repeated aa the
other marked by the Praeter. The example proves quite too much
for the author. M. S.

t [Geneaia then is a laU writing !]

1838.] EArw 7mMi« 148

tire 'first Mode ; m l^^^QI '^Vpi Vm\ $ became of iky name^
i. e. because thy name is so great, so wiU thou forgive^ Ps. 25:
11. A clause designatiDg time may also precede ; as y\9
Oljrn^ , at evening (when it is evening) then shall ye know,
Ex/l6: 6, 7. 17: 4. Gen. 3: 5.

(2) The Aorist is managed here, on account of either mean-
ing or form altogether in a manner like that of the relative se-
cond Mode (^ 478) ; and since this relative first, mode, em-
ployed as an Aorist, is a correlative of the second Mode, so this
latter is regularly and for the sake of complete correspondence
always employed after it [the first Mode] as an Aorist. In the
beginning of a sentence the first Mode relative sometimes stands
to designate the Future, ^ 472 ; but when this is so done, the
second Mode as Aorist cf coarse follows; e. g. Gen. 17: 12.
Deut. 15: 6. Only the poets (according to <^492) employ the
first Mode for the Juiuref and this but seldom ; as in Job 5: 20.
Is. 11: 8. If however the discourse turns upon a thing, which,
in comparison with other future things may be regarded as pasty
then the first relative Mode may be employed.

(3) In cases where '*n'»T. may be employed, (see ^ 479),
>^^71 may also be employed ; e. g. before limitations of time, as
tt^nil Di*3 :n^ni , and tt tutll come to pass at that time. So
before particles serving to mark designations of time ; as &M n^iil,
and it shall come to pass (/^. Or if the discourse has respect
to the pastf then render, so oft as ; Num. 21 : 9. Gen. 38: 9.
And so, also, before any words which indicate limitations of
time ; e. g. Gen. 4: 14, and it shaH be (n^rri) that every one
who findeth me, etc., = whenever one finos me, Ex. 18: 22.
In other cases likewise ; e. g. Hos. 2: 1. Deut. 7: 12. Is. 3:
24. 7: 22.

[C]

Participle or relative Tense*

^ 482. Since the Participle has its origin in the verb, but
its j^brm and immediate signification from the adjective, so it is
distinguished, when employed as a predicate with the significant
cy and construction of a verb, from the Modes [Praeter and
Future], inasmuch as it presents an action rather as continuing^
established, enduring, while the Modes designate merely the
practising or development of an action. Hence the Parttciple
is the tense of enduring condition or state ; which is explicuile

144 Hebrew Tensu. [Jav.

on the ground of its reference to another time present m thought
or words ; it is the relative Tense. It is accordingly employed,

^ 483. (1) Only in sentences, when the condition is evident
from circumstances to the hearer ; viz. {a) For the Present
relative f in respect to an action still continumg ; as lAh "^DbK ,
I [am] goings or / go at the present moment, Juag. 17: 9.
Often is nrrt prefixed, in order to mdicate the Cfmtinui^ state;
as li^?nn ^'»h« nan , behold ! thy brother is aTtgry^ Gen. 27:
42. l^he Pigrdciple is distinguished, when used for the Pres-
ent, from the second Mode employed in the like way (^ 473),
inasmuch as the first mdicates simply the continuance of a thing,
action, etc*, while the second indicates the renewal or repeti-
tion of it, or the contmually originating state.*

{b) For the Future relative^ in respect to an action which
one has already determined to do, and so that the future is in-
<dicated in this way as speedily to follow the present moment ;
ic. g. fiWhujTj wrjaw, we are about to destroy ^ Gen. 19: 13, 14.
Often here, also, with njn preceding.

(c) For the Praeter relative ; which, however, must be
evident to the hearer from other description of the past ; and
therefore rarely used in this sense when placed alone, e. g. Gen.
41: 17, l^y ^^2T\, behold ! 1 was standings i. e. during the
dream and this representation.

^ 484. (S) The Participle expresses, in connection with
other acti<»s, an action continuing during those other actions.
Therefore,

(a) In connection with a description of the past, it expresses
the Pr-aeter relative. In such a condition it can be joined to
the preceding •clause with a Vav (and) prefixed ; taibi ^ra
:i!g^, they came and Lot [was] settling down^ i. e. settled down
at that time, Gen. 19: 1. TTien Rebecca hastened and drew
[water], and the man was astonished^ ^%^^n. ^'^^.7\ > i* e. con-
tinued to be astonished while she did this,*(jen. 24* 21.

The state, moreover, and the longer time within which the
following action was done, may be expressed by the Participle,
so that the following clause is attached to the Participle by a
Vav relative, (unless where pathos of sentiment prevents this,
^ 478) ; e. g. t]'»b5h spja , tny sons were eatings then came a
windy etc. Job 1 : 18, 19*. 1 Sam. 2 : 13. To the participle

* In later Hebrew, the use of the second Mode in this way went
into desuetude; e. g. Eath. d: 18^ 14

18380 Hebrew Tenses. 145

thus employed 1^9, duringy whilst y continuing^ is often attached.
Job 1; 16—18.

lo like manner actions that continue while other things take
place, may be designated by the Participle in connection with
niz^N, '^; as in Gen. 47: 14. 39: 6. Seldom does the Parti-
ciple stand separately in such a sense ; as in Deut. 5: 5. Judg.
18: 1.

(&) In like positions in descriptions of the future, it stands for
the Future relative ; as in 1 Sam. 10: 8. 1 K. 1: 14.

(c) Also for the Present ; as in Ps. 35: 5, 6.

^ 485. The language first begins, and that at a late period,
to put before the Participle, when it was employed in respect
to the past, the verb :i^n ; and when respecting the future, the
verb rt;ri|; ; for in this way the time was more definitely desig-
nated, and a kind of independent tense was formed. So when,
according to ^ 484, (a) The Participle stands connected with
other actions ; as Joshua C}*iab rrri was clothed and standings
and then he said, Zech. 3: 3. Job 1: 14. Seldom does this
• happen, when the participle has a subsequent position and
stands more alone ; as in 2 Sam. 3 : 6. (b) Even without
such a connection, the Participle is employed to mark an action
long continuing during a specified time ; as t3^^^^ ^VT^ 9 V^
have [long and constantly] provoJcedy Deut. 9: 7. 22: 24. But
in narration conducted in this way, by this independent kind of
tense, it is sufiicient that the verb n^n has been once produced,
at the beginning of a paragraph ; 1 K. 5: 1.

^ 486. From this use of the Participle as a tense, difieis
entirely the use of it as a noun ; (even as a noun with the
article or m the construct state, although it may also be con-
strued as a Verb). It may be a simple noun, as pB':, a desert'
er ; or it may be in apposition with a noun ; or it may depend
on a noun in the construct state. Used thus as a noun, it in-
cludes the idea of a subject and a verb in itself; and therefore
is employed in cases where *^*«DN with the verb might be em-
ployed. Specially is it employed in appositiony where it at-
taches itself to the noun more easily than the verb. Since there
is properly no distinction of time in it, so it may be used re-
specting any time ; e. g. the Present ; the Praetery Gen. 27:
33. 1 Sam. 4: 8. II: 9« Geo. 19: 14 ; seldom the Future, as
Ex. 11:5. 2K. 3: 27.

Vol. XI. No. 29. 19

146 Hebrew Tenses. [Jan.

Rescabks on the preceding AcconiTT OF TBS Hebbew Tenses, bt

M. STlf AST.

Let us DOW endeavour to make as brief a recapitulation of
the leading ideas exhibited in these remarks of Ewald, as will
consist with doing justice to the author and with perspicuity.

(1) His main position is, that the so called Hebrew tenses
were not primarily desired at all to mark tense or time, bat
only modes of action.

This is more explicitly avowed in the preceding part of his
Grammar ; where (in ^ 193) he says : " Out of the roots of
verbs the [Hebrew] language does not construct so many forms
as ours for the designation of tenses and modes. Ct has, besides
the Participle and the In6nitive (both of which belong, in re-
spect to form, to nouns, ^ 218 — ^ 223), only two distinct forms
[the Praeter and Future] ; and these maJce rather the differ-
ence of MODE than of tense ; and hence this should be named
the first and second Mode.'^

(2) The first Mode, as thus defined, marks (in itself aoristv-
caUy in the widest sense of the word) that which is complete,
definite^ and certain. The secona Mode (aenistic m the
like way) designates that which is incomplete^ indefinite, and
dependent on circumstances.

On these propositions I have some remarks to make ; but I
reserve them, as also any others which I may have occasion to
make, until I shall have finished the present recapitulation.

(3) The first mode (Praeter), in conformity with its fun-
damental and modal meaning, designates, (a) The Past, in an
absolute and unconditional manner, and without reference or
relation to any particular thing, (b) The Present, when an
action before commenced may ana probably will be still re-
peated, (c) The Future, only when the thing is regarded as
completed or as altogether and unconditionally certain.

(4) The second mode (Future), in conformity also with
its general nature, designates, (a) That which is future or yet to
come, in the strict sense, (b) Also (by transition of thought
into the past), that which was future in such past time. {c\ In
like manner, the PauUhpost Future, or Futurum praetentum,
is designated by the second Mode.

But this is not all. •Inasmuch as the seamd Mode designates
the idea of that which is incomplete or unfinished, it is c(»ise-

1838.] Hebrew Temes. 147.

quently adapted to express any thing which b coming into
being or taking its rise, or is (as we say) in a forming state*
Hence as an action now doing is incomplete^ the second Mode
is adapted to express, {d) The Present, (e) The mind may
look back on things that were being done, etc., in time past,
and the second Mode b employed to represent them in that
state, (like the Latin Imperfect). (/) As kindred to this, and
quite analogous to it, is the case of often repeated action, which
is conceived of as a thing that has taken place and will again
take place. The expression of this, therefore, is appropriate to
the second Mode.

Once more ; that which is indejined, that which is depen-
dent on feelings, wishes, circumstances, etc., belongs appropri-
ately to the second Mode. Consequently it is employed, (g)
to express the sense of the Coryunctive or Subjunctive mode.
(A) Ais a ramification of the same general idea, the second
Mode also designates the Optative^ or that which is hortatory,
desiderative, jussive, or permissive.

Such is the wide ground that the Praeter and Future occupy
in their simple state, according to the views of Ewald. But,
(5) There is another state in which the usage of the Hebrew has
placed them both, without the formality of a different mode pf
declension. This is by prefixing Vav relative to them ; to the
Future by Vav with Pattahh and Daghesh following it, to the
Praeter by Vav with the usual conjunction-vowel, i. e. Sheva.
This gives rise to a great variety of expression in both tenses,
or (to speak with Ewald) in both Modes.

In ^ 244, Ewald has stated, that Vav prefixed to the Future
by Pattahh and followed by Daghesh forte is entirely different
from 1 (and) the usual conjunction. In <$» 245 he has affirmed
the same, as to this difference from the common i , respecting
Vav before the Praeter. In his larger Grammar he gives his
solution of the difficulty which apparently arises from the punc-
tuation of the Vav being so different in these two cases. He
there states (p. 539), that the Vav of the Future (*i) arose
from the verb n^ni , so that iri^^i is equivalent to, or the same
as iPq^ ^Vl] 9 ^^ *^ ^^'''"^ to pass [that] he would ivrite = he
wrote, lie old root of rt^n he makes to be '»^rj ; then by
syncope we have "^n ; and then ^^'] is easily abridged into
^1 s=-2 . In this way the Vav prefixed to the Future received
its shape and meanbg ; for the Future with this prefixed be-
comes a compound form, and, like the verb of exbtence with

148 Hebrew Tense$. [Jan.

the Future tense in Arabic and Syriac, expresses the meaning
o( the past, Ewald, however^ does not admit this analogy, be-
cause the Vav conversive in Hebrew also retains in itself a cop-
ulaiive sense {and)^ as well as a conversive one.

But there are other difficulties here, which this theory does
not explain, and which will be mentioned in the sequel.

(6) Vav relative with the Future always refers to a
new rise and originating of an action out of that which precedes.
It signifies, (a) A sequency of time, (viewing it ^spast time),
— a sequency to something that preceded it and that is aoristi-
cdUy narrated. But when introduced thus, it may go on suc-
cessively indicating things that followed one another, (b) It
may also designate the Future and the Present ; but this must
be shewn by the tenor of the discourse, and lies not in the na-
ture of the form, (c) It indicates a sequency in respect to
thought ; and so it designates a consequence that follows from
premises, or an apodosis, or a resuming of the thread of narra-
tion which has been interrupted by a clause thrown in.

(d) It must always be preceded by some clause ; for it has
a sense that must always be relative. It matters not, however,
what that preceding clause is, whether a verb, a clause without
one, or a detached sentiment.

From this view it follows, (a) That where sequency is not
indicated by the sense, this form of the Future is excluded.
Other tenses are then employed. Of course, (/) This future
is excluded in a subordinate clause thrown in, which does not
advance the narration. So, (g) When such clauses begin with
•n^K , ''s , etc., which constitute as it were a new sentence, in-
serted not in the regular succession of the discourse, (h) When
any word in the sentence or clause must stand before the verb,
this form (relative Future) is excluded ; of course titb (which
dl^siys precedes) excludes it. But in order to preserve the
power of employing the conversive or relative Future in such
cases, ^11. {and it came to pass) is often inserted before cir-
cumstances thus thrown in, e. g. before limitations of time, in
some cases before other words, and then the narration may go
on again with the relative Future.

(7) Vav relative with the Praeter is employed when
things certain are designated ; or things which (if they are yet
to happen) are looked upon as certain. In this case the Fu-
ture precedes as Aorist ; and then, the relative Praeter desig-
nateSj (a) The Future, {b) The Present, specially in contin-

1888.] Hebrew Tenses. 149

ued or often recurring actions. Here the verb in any form, or
a participle, may precede, (c) The Conjunctive mode, (d)
The relative Praeter stands after the Imperative mode, in order
to designate the action which follows the command.

(8) or both the relative Tenses it may be said ; (a) That
they cannot stand in the beginning of a discourse, paragraph,
etc. {b) Of the relative Praeter we may also say, that when
it precedes a Future, and is itself used in a juture sense, then
the Future tense which follows must be taken as an aoristic
tense, (c) Instead of ^rjli (see ^ 479) employed so as to pre-
serve the continuity of relative Futures, n^n] [and it shall comt
to pass) is used in like circumstances, i. e. before clauses deno^
ting limitation of time, etc.

(9) Pakticiple or relative Tense. The generic sense
denotes something as continuing^ established, enduring ; while
the Modes express the developmentitself of action, etc. Hence
the Participle is employed to designate,

(a) The relative Present. (6) The relative Future ; one
which is speedily to commence— like the Latin Future in -itM.
(c) The relative Praeter. (d) An action continuing while oth«
ers were doing or continuing ; or a state or condition which last-
ed while other things took place, (e) The Participle sometimes
joins the verb of ex'istence with it, and thus forms a kbd of
independent tense by itself.

My object b making this summary has been, to facilitate the
understanding of the whole subject as represented by Ewald.
But on reviewing it, I cannot promise myself that the reader
will not be puzzled, at times, and find it cCfficult to satisfy him-
self precisely in respect to the object aimed at. If so, I can
only say, that he will not probably be more perplexed than I
have been, in reading and endeavouring to understand and trans-
late Ewald's remarlu. He has so much of tenuous theory and
of hair-splitting distinctions, and withal is so negligent as to his
style, that it needs a mind more like his own than mine is, to
comprehend, certainly to be satisfied with, all the d$angiasig
which he makes.

But now to the substance of the matter itself. I begin my
remarks by observing, that, for the most part, he has only
brought before us old things with new names, or well known
fiicts with new and sometimes ingenious theories to account for
tbem. This seems to be the tendency of bis whole grammati-

150 Hebrew Temei. [Jxir.

cal woriE. Even in his Fotmenlehre, u e. that part of his Gnun*
mar which has respect to the forpu of the different parts of
speech in the Hebrew language, he has departed from all pre-
ceding grammarians — departed so widely, and in some cases
(as it seems to me) so arbitrarily, that I believe a beginner in
Hebrew would find it next to imposible, by the aid of his Gram-
mar only, to attain to a competent knowledge of the Hebrew
forms. Many an interesting, curious, and acute remark he
makes, indeed, in the course of his work;. but what is new,
striking, or curious, is not always imtructive.

It will be seen, by an attentive perusal of the preceding sum-
mary, that Ewald has represented, in one way or another, each
of the five forms of the Hebrew verb which he brings to view, as
occasionally designating the Present, the Past, and the Future ;
i. e. he has represented these forms, after all> as being aorUH^
colly employed, in the widest sense of this word. What more
or less had Gesenius and others done before him ?

Yet he begins by telling us, that in the proper sense of the
word the Hebrew has no tense. T^e so called Praeter and
Future were originally nothing more, he says, than Modes;
the first designating that which is comphte^ definite^ and cer-
tain ; the second, £at which is incomplete^ indefinite^ and ie-
pendent on circumstances. Why the same things could not in
substance be said of the Greek Praeterites and Futures, I do
not know ; nor has he given us any specific reason for making
a distinction here between the Hebrew and other languages.
That which is Juture is of course in some sense incomplete ; it
b ako, from the nature of the case, oftentimes indefinite, and
oflen likewise it must be d^endeiu on circumstances. . The
Futures proper, in all languages must express ideas belonging
to this category ; nor do I see how they would be Futures,
unless they did. But more of this in the sequel.

Why then shall we call the Praeter and Future of Hebrew
verbs, the first and second Mode 1 Mode is technically de-
fined to mean, in grammar, the m€mner of representing an ac*
turn or being. Now if the Hebrew tenses are to be called
Modes because they do this merely in some sense, then the
Greek tenses must be called Modes for the like reason, and all
tenses in any language must be called Modes ; for all tenses
and every tense necessarily express, along with time, some mode
of action. Certainly they must do this, unless we say that
they do not express action at all. But as we cannot say this

1838.] Hebrew Tenm. 151

of any verb, in any of its phases, so, it being coticeded that ac-
tion is expressed, some mode of it must also be expressed, for
otherwise we must make it out, that definite action can exist
and be expressed, and yet a mode of it at the same time not be
designated ; which would be merely saying, that an action
took place, but not in any mode or manner.

This reasoning, of course, will not apply to the Infiniiint
Mode ; for this, from its very nature, is a nomen verbcde^ and
is designed merely to express action without any limitation.

When grammarians say, therefore, that Mode is the manner
of representing action or beings they do and must have some
spec^ limitations in view, within which this definition will be
found intelligible and distinctive. What are these ? They re-
fer, I apprehend, solely to distinction between podtive and
conditional assertions, e. g. in Greek the Indicative Mode is
declarative and positive, and th^ Subjunctive and Optative are
conditional in some sense or other ; or else they refer to what
is jussivcy e. g. the Imperative Mode in distinction' from those
just named ; or finally, they make an absolute declaration of
simple action limited neither by time nor person, as e. g. the
Infinitive. The same Modesy in this sense of Mode, may of
course exist in the passive vdce as in the active ; and accord-
ingly we find tbem there in Ghreek, Latin, etc.

It is manifest from this brief view of Modesy that time and
person are merely accidental to them ; some have them, viz.
the Indicative, etc., and some have them not, viz. the Infinitive.
These may accompany the Modes ; for the most part they do ;
but they do not constitute an essential part, nor strictly speaking
any part, of what properly belongs to Mode in the sense of
grammarians.

Let us now inquire, whether Prof. Ewald has said any thing
to shew us, why the Praeter and Future should be called
Modes 1 Is it that the one declares conditionaUy and the other
positively 1 Not at all. Both are equally positive in the great
majority of cases, and both are occasionally conditional. Both
declare things past, present, and fiiture ; and both occasionally
relate tbem as conditional and incomplete. His own statement
shews this. The main distinction on which the actual discrep-
ancy of Modes really rests, is not applk^ible, therefore, to this
case. At least if it be so, it may be as wcU applied to the
Greek tenses as to the Hebrew.

I take for granted, that no speculative philosophy can ^ew

153 Hebrew Tente$. [Jan.

us any probability, that the Hebrews Or any other nation ever
employed verbs in all their drSerent forms, without reference to
teme, i. e. without btending to designate tense thereby. An
action as conceived of most simply by the mind in its uninstnict-
ed state, is viewed either as past^ present^ or future. Hence
the verbs of nearly all languages designate each of these by dis*
tioct forms. Even the Hebrew is wont to express the simple
present, where the past and future are not at all regarded, by
the use of an active participle ; which might be named (as it
has been) the present tense.

If Prof. Ewald should ask me here, how it comes about that
die Hebrew has no Modes, i. e. has none on the supposition,
that it has tenses in the usual sense of that word ; my answer
would be, that the distinction of Modes is evidently a later and
less obvious thing than the distinction of tense. In many Ian*
guages the Modes are not expressed at all, or scarcely or verpr
imperfectly so, by the forms of verbs, but are made by adjecti-
dous particles, or helping verbs, which express the sense needed.
It would seem, therefore, that there is less need of mode than
of tense ; or at any rate, that such has been the feeling of man-
kind in the formation of many languages.

If this view b correct, then it follows that the theory of
Prof. Ewald is, in its own nature, an improbable one. The
need of .tense would be sooner thought of and felt, than the
need of mode ; and it is therefore more probable in itself that
modes were left undistinguished m the Hebrew language, than
that tenses were.

Nor are we confined to a speculative view of the case. It is
easy to produce examples, and many of them too if time were
allowed, in which the distinction of time is plainly and definite-
ly the great object in view, in the use of the Praeter and Fu-
ture. Take, tor example, Is. 46 : 4. Jehovah is introduced
by the writer as saying : ' Who hath carried them [the house of
Israel] from the womb, who hath held them up from their birth ?'
In the sequel he answers the question : M^fij *^3fifti *^n^3? '^Sfit,
I have done [this], and I will do it, ox I vnU uphold them.
So again in v. 11. IrijlpjfijPjfit •Tin:^; sjsjj'agjqw'^nna'^, JAa«e

fomised aiid I will accomplish itf I have formed the plan and
wiU carry it into execution. Here plainly the emphatic
pdnt of contrast is the past and the future. God has done
the one thing in time past, and this is the pledge that he wiU
do the correspondent tmng b timejuture.

1808.] Hthrew Ten$e$. 158

Let us return &r a moment here, to the consideration of
Prof. Ewald's view of the original nature and design of the
second Mode, i. e. of the soKsalled Future. It designates, says
be, ' what is ineompletef indefinitey and dependent on circum-
itanceiJ Now he is safe as to the first of these allegations, in-
deed, for a tense which designates the proper future, must, it
is sufficiently obvious, designate what is incomplete. But as to
indefimie here, i. e. in the examples above produced, or the
dependent (m circumstances, what is there to support his view
oTthe subject? / have done this thing, i. e. upheld the peo-

?le of Israel, is no more definite, than J vnU uphold them again.
\e execution of this promise, a promise uttered by the Al-
mighty Grod — is not dependent on circumstances,— certably
not upon any that we know or can even imagine. The prom-
ise involves the idea, that no circumstances shall be such as to
prevent the fiilfilment of it.

What is true of the Future in the two passages above quoted,
is equally true of thousands of Futures in the Old Testament ;
it is true of nearly all c^the unnumbered Futures converted in-
to a Praeter sense by Vav. No imaginable distinction can be
made in respect to this class of verbal forms, on the ground of
iandefinUeness or uncertainty or dependence on circumstancesy
and the Praeter when employed in its simple aoristic and his-
toric sense.

Does any reader doubt this ? Then let him open any where
in cfae Hebrew Bible and make the experiment, for this is the
only satkfactory way of testing such matters. We will turn
to the first chapter of Genesis ; for all concede that the Penta-
teuch, be it written sooner or later, is one of the finest of all
the examples of classksal Hebrew style to be found in the Old
Testament.

In Gen. 1: 3, we have the first example of a converted Fu-
ture in ni^fit"! , and [God] said. Now this is no more condi-
tional, nor indefinite, nor dependent on circumstances, nor even
mcomplete, than when in the preceding verse, the writer savs :
^ The earth nn'^rr was without form, etc.' The sense here has
not one of the attributes ascribed to the second Mode by Prof.
Ewald, excepting that it stands in a sequency of thought and of
time. Of this, more hereafter. Let us confine ourselves, for
the present, entirely to the examination of the preceding alleged
attributes of the second Mode.

Pass on down the page. Verse 3d gives us fin;*) , and [God]
Vol. XL No. 99. 20

154 Hebretff Ten$e$* [J Air.

saw; bl^llfOnd he corned a se^foraitum. Verse 4, tl*^;> i »
and he called. Here in this last instance we have, m the cor-
responding clause which follows it, an instructive exhibition of
the true design of that form of the Future tense in question,
i. e. when it is employed with Vav. The two clauses of the
verse stand thus : ' And God called (fi^'^R!!) to the light— day,
to the darkness he called (M^lj^) night.' JNothing can be more
plain in this case, than that the certamty, the definiteness, and
the sequencyy of both these forms of tne same verb here, are
precisely the same ; and the only reason that Ewald gives, in
such cases, why the Praeier form is chosen (as in respect to
MnjP here) is, that it is preceded by a word or words (as here

byt^nbi).

We proceed with the converted Futures. In Gen. 1 : &
(besides those already stated), Wj twice. In v. 6, *^T^^'^\ ;
V. 7, lD?»i , b«il, •»n;i; v. 8, vn'?f^% •»n';j twice ; v. 9, wn ,
■nqfi^^l; V. 10, «'3p,^.li «^S1» Aii so the reader may ^ on,
through the whole chapter, nay, through the whole Pentateuch
and the whole Hebrew Bible, and find numberless examples of
the same tenor, i. e. plain, absolute, unconditional, unlimited,
unequivocal declarations of facts in time past, and simply Au-
ioric aoristsy for aught that I can possibly see, precisely of the
like tenor with the Greek Aorists, or other Praeterited used in
their room.

I am aware of the reply which Prof. Ewald would make to
this statement. He would appeal to his account of the relative
Future, i. e. the Future with Vav conversive as exhibited in
^ 476 above, and say, that it is a Future relative and not abso-
lute, which is indicated by such forms, viz. a Future compared
with something in the narration which preceded it, and not
with the time when the writer is composing his narration.
The whole took place in time past, as it relates to the latter
point of time ; but the thing designated by the relative Future
was a proper sequent of that which he had before mentioned,
and so was fiiture to that.

The fact I will, for the sake of discussion, allow. Whether
this sequency is in truth always indicated by the so-called coft-
versive Future, as Ewald seems to assert, is a question to which
we may hereafter come. For the present we will allow the
relative future sense ; for in most cases it is undoubtedly a mat-
ter of fact.

The fair question now will be, Whether the future form,

1838.] Hebrew Tenses. 155

tvithowt this Vay oonyersive, does also at times convey a Ptae-
terite sense like that of the relative Future, and is employed
where the Praeter might have been used to all intents and pur-
poses with the same significancy ?

* To the law and the testimony ;' we cannot settle this point
on the ground of theory. Pass on then in the narration to
chap. 2. v. 10 : ' And a river issued from Eden to water the
garden, and from thence nn©^ (Niph. Future), it was dividedy
rr^nj and became four sources.' Now here is the Future tci^A-
out Vav, which designates the past time ; and here too is a
sequency, not of time, perhaps, but at least of idea. The issu-
mg of the river from the garden preceded its division, (we might
say, in point of time, but at all events we must say) in point of
fact, and in the order of idea und of narration. Accordingly
fr^M"! , a simple Praeterite with i (and) before it, is conjoined
with the Future form Ty^'] , has relation to the same subject or
Nominative with that form, and designates the same point of
time, because the division itself made the four sources which
the narration mentions.

Pass we on to V. 25 of the same chapter ; ^ And the man
and his wife were both naked, *i;rh^ian'j ^h\ and they were not
ashamed. Now here is another sequency both of time and of
iact. The nakedness precedes ; the unblushing condition of a
state of perfect innocence is consequent ; and, so far as the
matter before us is concerned, we must say, it is necessarily
connected with the former. Now in the clause which imme-
diately precedes the simple Future, we have a relative Future,
^''rt'^l; while here, the 1 before the Future is omitted. Here,
moreover, is no uncertainty, no indefiniteness ; it is a simple
declaration of fact, and, for aught that I can see, differs not in
sense at all from what it would signify if the writer had said,

Take another instance from v. 6 of the same chapter: ^ And
a mist Tfzj^l went up from the ground, etc' Then follows in
the next dause, f^jjttjni , * and watered the face of the ground.*
Here is a Praeter again, with a simple copula (i) before it,
arranged in the same series of thought, and under the same
condition and circumstances as the Future mJ;?,^. There is no
more uncertainty in the one than in the other; no more indefi-
niteness in the one than in the other ; and no more of sequency
in the one than in the other, i. e. both are sequendes in respect
to time and in the ideas of the writer.

156 Hebrew Temei. [Jar.

Let us go, for a moment, into other books. In 2 K» 13: 90
the writer says : ^ And the bands of Moab ^fiia; came up to or
invaded the land.' In the preceding clause are two Futures
with Vav conversive, designating the common historic Praeter
sense. The narration which eidiibits %fi(l^ is of the same tenor
with them^ and stands in like circumstances.

But perhaps the later Hebrew of this book will be objected
to. Let us go then into Ps. xviii., and see how the usage is
there. In v. 6 seq. the writer says : * In my distress ^'iJi^ I
called upon Jehovah, to Jehovah :^1^K did I raise my cty,
972T&\ he heard my voice from his temple, and my cry fi(3n came
into his ears. Then did the earth shsJce and tremble, [two
Futures with Vav conversive], and the foundations of the
mountains ^iTan*^ trembled. V. 9, rt^aj there went vp [simple
Praeterite] a smoke through his nostnls, and a fire fix>m his
mouth ^d^n devoured^ [simple Future in the same circum-
stances as the preceding Praeter], coals Icindled ^"^^^J [Praeter]
by it.' Then follow four Futures with Vav conversive. V. 12,
T)'^l [Future without Vav] ^ he made darkness his hiding place,
etc'

Now nothing can be plainer than that the Praeter, the sim-
ple Future, and the Future with Vav, are all employed here in
simple narration of the past, in the same way and without any
even imaginable distinction as to dependence, succession, con-
ditionality, definiteness, or any thing else of the like nature. It
is manifestly a simple, aoristic, Praeterite narration. All theo-
retical speculations which lead us to adopt the conclusion, that
the distinctions of tense are never abandoned in Hebrew, nor
the difference of forms ever superseded or neglected, surely fall
before such an exhibitk)n as this.

Nor must this be set aside, because it is poetry* Poetry, in
Hebrew, no doubt allows of some peculiar forms for a few
words ; and few indeed they are. But poetry does not violate
the fundamental laws of syntax. It is the figurative nature of
its representations, the elevation of thought and style, and the
rhythmical nature of its structure, which, with these few pecu-
liar forms of words, distinguish poetry from prose. It leaves
the laws of Syntax, the great principles of the language, in the
main untouched. Irregularities in regard to these laws, when-
ever they occur, are as frequent in the prose of the Old Testa-
ment as in the poetry.

But there are cases even more striking, in some resp'^^^'^.

1838.] Hebrew Tenses. 157

than any of those produced, 'Piese are such as follow parti*
cles that actually and de6nitely express the Hme past. Thus
in Josh. 10: 12, n^^*; t^, Uhen spake Joshua y Ex. 15: J,
^"^^ ^^> ^tAen sang Moses ;' and so in 1 K. 3: 16. 9:. 11.
16: 21, and often elsewhere.

So after t3*]t), before^ before that, the simple Future is often
used ; Gen. 2: 5. 24: 45, and often elsewhere. But here, the
nature of the particle might afford some ground for the use of
the Future.

But Ewald, I am aware, has endeavored to provide against
the exigency which would arise from urging such examples as
these upon him ; and such might be urged to an extent that
hardly aidmits of any limitation. He tells, in <^ 473, that the
idea of becoming this or that, of originating , of being in a form'-
ing state, of repeated action, etc., all belong to the Future ;
and when an example occurs which would press hard upon
him, as to a Praeterite sense of the simple Future, he breaks
the force of the pressure by averring, that it is customary
m poetry, and sometimes also in prose, to represent actions in
past time as being then in a course of performance^ and things
as then originating, developing themselves, or talcing their
rise. Accordingly, in order to illustrate this, he appeals to Job*
38: 21, < Knowest thou this because 1^^ TM thou wast then
bom V An unlucky example, surely, (or such a purpose !
Can it be supposed, now, that the speaker meant to say :
' Knewest thou this, because thou wast %n the process of being
bom ?' Or, ^ because thou wast actually bom ?'

He refers us again to Job 3: 3, ' Perish the day ifi l\\^ in
whidi I was bomJ Here too we may well ask : Does Job
mean to represent himself as in the process of birth on thatday,
or does he mean to designate the action as completed ? Once
more he refers us to Job 3: 1 1, « Why did Inot die (n^Joij . .filb)
from the womb ? [Why did I not] expire ('1^^) as I oame
forth ijx)m the beUy ?' Now whatever might be said in defence
of that signification of the simple Future (here are two of them),
assigned to it by Ewald, viz., that of or^nating, developing
itself, etc., it must apply, if it is at all applicable, to other verbs
as well as to those which ^gnify to be bom, or to come into be*
ing. It is not the meaning of a verb, considered in this point
of lif ht, which has aoy thing to do with Mode and Tense. Ac-
cocdmgly. Job not only employs the simple Future to signifjf
his birth in time past, but also to designate death in time past.

158 Hebrew Tenses. [Jak.

(n«i)9fic , ^1^^)* But is it a C9ntin'aedf a repeated act of death
that lie wbhes for himself, or designates ? No more, I answer,
can this be supposed, than that the birth before mentioned means
a repeated birth.

But Ewald presents us with another branch of this meaning
of the simple Future, which, as he maintains, springs out of the
idea of becoming something, developing, originating, etc. The
Present tense indicates something, ne says, which evidently be-
longs to this category. It is not what is stationary, done, tran-
sacted, but something which is in doing, which is taking rise,
etc. Hence the simple Future may designate thi? also. The
appeal is made to Num. 23: 7, * From Syria Balak, king of
Moab, ^3|-|^2 1 conducts me.' So would he render this last word ;
but it seems to me quite a plain case, that the Praeterite sense
is the one here to be giyen — * Balak hath conducted me — and
that is the reason why I am now here present.'

But however unsatisfactory the prooi adduced by Ewald may
be in this case, yet nothmg is more certain than that the Future
does often designate the Present; e. g. 9*^» ft^b, I know n^t,
1 K. 3: 7. So Is. 1: 13, i?8|« tKb , / cannot; Prov. 15 : 20,
* A wise son nato^ maketh glad his father, etc.' But is this
merely in conseauence of the peculiar sense given to the so-
called second Mode ? Not at all ; the Praeter often has the
sense of the Present too ; e. g. "*rpjn[^ J know, Ibj^ he is small,
Ps. 1: 1, 'Blessed fa the man who walketh not (^bn) in the
counsel of the ungodly, who standeth not (in:j) in the way of
sinners, who sitieth not (^^;) in the seat of scomers.' And
so in cases without number.

Even so is it, moreover, with the relative Future, as Ewald
enjoins it upon us to name it. E. g. ' And the land MlbTsPii is
JuU of silver,' etc., Is. 2: 7, 8. So bSKn*;! and mourns] in 2
Sam. 19: 2 ; et saepe alibi.

With such facts as these before us, how shall we concede to
the Future the designation of the Present, on the peculiar
ground that it signifies what is originating or developing itself,
etc. ? Has not the Present the same sense, when it is designa-
ted by the Praeter, the Future relative, and the Participle,
which last confessedly designates it in instances beyond enu-
meration ? It is sometimes said, that ' it fa a poor rule which
will not work both ways ;' and whatever limitations thfa maxim
may have, in the case before us, it fa impossible to shew that the
designation of the Present tense belongs to the Future on the

1838.] Bdfrew Tensti. 159

ground of sometbing appropriate to the nature of the Present
tense, and yet that the Praeter and relative Future and Partici-
ple all designate the Present — without any good reason for it,
or for a different reason from that which belongs to the designa-
tion by the simple Future.

I have said enough to shew, that there is no stable ground
to support the assertion, that the simple future form may not be
employed to designate the past and the present. It is thus
employed in a multitude of cases. And if the reason given by
Ewald, why it is so employed, is a good one, then I might as-
sume a position like Ewald's in respect to the appropriate mean-
ing of the Praeter, and the relative future, and argue from this
that they designate the Present because it contains this appro-
priate sense. What proves too much, does not prove — quite
enough.

But let us now examine, for a moment, another of the lead-
mg positions of Prof. Ewald, in regard to the use of the tenses ;
viz., that when Vav conversive precedes the Future, it always
(stets) develops the idea of becomingy of taking rise, or ori^
natir^y and so the composite form in question describes the nse
or origination of an action out of some foregoing one, ^ 476.

But this general position is somewhat modified, by his after-
wards telling us, that such a relative Future may designate
either a sequency in respect to time, or one in respect to ideas*

One would have naturally understood him to mean, by his
first general affirmation, that caiao^on, or rather the effect
which follows causation, is exclusively designated by the rela-
tive Future. But still we will not insist on this ; for he has a
right to his own definitions and limitations. A sequency in point
of time, then, is one thing designated ; the other is, sequency
in respect to ideas in the mind, i. e. conclusions drawn from
premises, or apodosis completing a protasis, as he himself ex-^
plains it, ^ 476. And this relation to something antecedent
and what immediately precedes, is indispensable, as he evident-
ly appears testate the matter, to the use of the relative Future^
i. e. the Future with Vav conversive.

But is this so ? Let us examine several cases which readily
present themselves. In Gen. 2: 8, the writer tells us, that
** Jehovah planted a garden in Eden, toward the East, and
there he placed the man whom he had made ; and there Je-
hovah God made to grow fifom the ground every tree pleasing to
the sight and good for food, etc." The writer goes on, in verses

160 Hebrew Tenser [1838.

10 — 14, to describe the riyer which flowed from the garden,
and the four rivers that were disparted from it. After this,
in verse 15, he again resumes the thread of his narration;
*And Jehovah took np^i (relative Future) the man, ^ntTS*2,and
brought him into the garden, etc' Here then is not a sequency
in the narration. This same fact had been already stated in
verse 8 ; and after this statement, other things, viz., the growth
and flourishing of the plants, etc., are related as matters that
took place subsequent to the introduction of man into the gar-
den. But in verse 15 the placing of man in the garden is again
stated, and of course this is something which preceded^ not
which followed, the growth of the plants, etc. Should it be
said that the matter in verses 10 — 14 gives occasion to the
relative Futures in verse 15, the answer is, that this matter is
of such a nature, and so independent of the tenor of the narra-
tive, that there is no proper sequency here, nor is there a rela-
tive Future, nor a ^rj^i {^ 479 above) to keep up the sequent
cy in question.

But if any one is still disposed to doubt whether a Pluper-
fect sense can be given to the relative Future here, let him pass
on to Gen. 12:1,' Now Jehovah had said (*^^A«l) to Abra-
ham : Get thee out of thy country, etc. ;' yet the two verses of
the narrative which immediately precede this, viz. Gen. 11 : 31,
32 tell us, that Sarah had, some time before this, left Ur of the
Chaldees and gone out with Abraham to Haran, where the
former died. So here is not sequency in "^>)N^1 » but regression ;
for it reverts to something which happened beforo Sarah and
Abraham left Ur, (comp. Acts 7 : 2, 3), and is therefore, as to
meaningy a proper Fluperfect.

Again, in Gen. 24 : 29 it is stated that ' Laban ran out to
meet the man (Abraham's servant) at the well.' Yet in the
{(ucceding verse (v. 30) it is said ; * it came topasSy ^^J^$ that
when Laban saw the rings upon the fingers of his sister Kebec-
ca, etc., Kl^i , that he went out to the man, etc' Beyond all
question the narrative in the thirtieth verse exhibits facts which
precede what is stated in the latter part of the 29th verse.

In Gen. 27 : 23 it is stated that * Isaac blessed (inSWj)
Jacob.' Then in vs. 24 seq. is related all the previous convert
versation on this occasion, and this narration begins with a
*l^**l»y5^^ Isaac had said, etc.

In Gen. 24 : 61, It is said : ^ And Rebecca arose, and ber
maidens, and they rode upon the camels, and went after the

1838.] Hebrew Tema. 161

man [the servant of Abraham], njg^l and the man took Rebec-
ca and departed.' Now here the action of taking her and com-
mencing his departure, surely preceded the riding upon the
camels and going after the servant in question.

So in Is. 48 : 18, 19, ' O that thou hadst listened to my
commandments ! '^n'^,;> then had been thy peace * like a river,
etc., and thy seed "^n^i had been as the sand of the sea, etc'
But here Ewald would probably say, that the "^n^i designates
an event subsequent to the listening which is mentioned.

Enough pf examples of a Pluperfect sense of the Future
with Vav. It were easy to multiply them, did my limits per-
miL If any one doubts, let him take up his Hebrew Bible and
read on, with attention, through a few pages, and watch the de-
velopment of this so-called relative Future, independently of
any system or theory in respect to it. If he does not then give
up the theory of Prof. Ewald, it will not be for want of evidence
that it will not abide the test of experiment.

It would be easy to call in question, and (as it seems to me)
to render altogether doubtful, several other positions of Ewald,
in respect to the Future tense. But as these are only some of
the fine-spun threads of his web, and too tenuous to give it much
support or consistency, I pass them by, lest I should exhaust
the patience of the reader.

Will he indulge me, however, while I briefly examine some
of the positions of this learned Professor, in respect to the Prae^
ter tense, or fas he names it^ Jirst Mode 1

He begins oy teUing us, tnat ' it designates only what b com-
pletey definite^ and certain^ ^471. Yet in ^ 472 he con-
cedes, that the Praeter sometimes stands as a designation of the
Future ; but it is only when that Future is viewed by the mind
as already in effect completed^ or, at least, it must be absolutely
and unconditionally certain that it will be completed.

It would seem from this account of the future sense of the
Praeter, that when it is so employed there arises an intensity
of signification in consequence of it. The certainty is grounded,
in the view of the writer, (at least this seems to me to be Ewald's
view of the case), on the foundation of a divine assurance ; so
that the use of a Praeter in this way could hardly be proper,
except in words represented as spoken by the divine Being him-
self, or by others speaking merely by his authority.

Now as to the fact, that in predictions, assurances, or prom-
ises, etc., the Praeter is often employed in a Future sense, this

Vol. XL No. 29. 21

16S Hebrew Tenses. [Jam.

is 80 evident that all acknowledge it ; and it is conceded bf
Ewald himself in ^ 472 ; so that it is unnecessary for me to
make any effi)rt to prove it. But still I have a question to ask
here, which relates to this subject ; viz. How comes it, that in
the same prediction, such Praeterites as those now before us
and also proper Futures are commingled ? Is the one more
intense and certain than the other ? And if not, how can this
be a ground for employing the Praeter in the place of the Fu-
ture, where a proper future sense is to be conveyed ?

Take for example Is. 9: 1, *The people who were walking
in darkness shall see (^Mn) a great light ; and as to those who
dwelt in the land of the shadow of death, light shall shine

i'mi) upon them, etc.' Then follow other verbs of the like
brm and with % future sense ; then some with a present sense
(by transfer of the scene of action) ; then simple future forms,
and then others still with Vav conversive. AH this in one and
the same picture of future events, all of which are equally de-
6nite and certain.

So again in Is. 5 : 13, ' Therefore my people nbft , shall
go into captivity .... therefore Hades shaU enlarge herself
(na^nn), etc.* Then follow n*)?,g . . • iTi; m^fiUure sense ;
and then immediately succeed n4*l . . . ^^*.l • • • ^J^?^*? » etc.
all Futures relative, yet all in the same prediction, and in the
same circumstances as to certainty] etc., as the Praeterite forms
which had been before employed. See also Is. 5 : 25, 26,
where the same phenomenon again occurs ; and so in Is. 11:
1 — 10, and often elsewhere.

Ewald asserts, that all the cases where the Praeter is thus
employed, are of that class which have been described above,
i. e. that they are all cases of absolute certainty, and are looked
upon as already accomplished for that reason. Yet when the
proper Future, the relative Future, and the participle are em-
ployed in the very same prediction, and all respect parts of
one and the same great occurrence, parts that are all equallv
certain — all equally definite — how is it in the nature of possi-
bles to make a distinction such as Ewald here makes, in regard
to the Praeterites employed to designate the Future ? I say
again, that which proves too much — does not prove enough.

Such is Ewald's statement respecting the simple Praeter,
and such the grounds for calling it in question. But there is
another view which he has given us of the Praeter with Vav pre-
fixed, (^ 480 seq.), which claims and should receive some of
our attention.

1838.] Hebrew Teme$. 163

To the Praeter of this class he assigns the task of designa-
ting what is certain, or, if it be yet to happen, what is as
good as completed, in the view of the speaker. Here then, as
the use of such a Praeter is one of the most frequent of all the
Hebrew forms in respect to the designation of actions that are
future, it is evident we must have a large multitude of intensive
declarations in the Scriptures. Every where certainty becomes
the reigning order of the day. There is scarcely room left fqr
opinion, or softened forms of speech, or conditionalities of things,
but almost all b either certain, or looked upon as absolutely so.

My first remark on this view of the subject is, that no lan-
guage abounds, or can abound, with such an unlimited mass of
tntensitives. Where all is intensive, nothing is so ; and where
such a vast proportion b intensive, as this form of the Praeter
would constitute in Hebrew sentences, emphasis must be nearly
out of question. So much of it — makes none.

But I have difficulties, also, with other views of Prof. Ewald,
in relation to this form of the Praeter. He says (^ 480), that
* when this relative Praeter is employed to designate a jtUure
sense, it is a more definite and decisive form than the relative
Future.' I do not understand him here. Does he mean that
it designates the Future more decisively or definitely than the
Future with Vav conversive designates it ? He cannot mean
this, I think, because he does not assign Sijuture sense to this
relative Future,, if I rightly apprehend him. He must mean,
then, that the relative Praeter is more definite in the expression
of the meaning which it designates, than is the relative Future.
If this be the meaning, I am quite at a loss to know what can
be said which will confirm such an assertion.

The yoc^, that the Praeter with Vav stands, in cases without
number, to designate actions future, is so beyond all question,
that neither Ewald nor any other Hebrew scholar will attempt
to deny it. But the marked distinction of the future, when
designated by this form of the verb, is what is peculiar to Ewald
and his followers, and is what now claims our examination.

Let. us begin with the. very example which he adduces in
order to confinn his statement, viz. tihb;^ if^l^ he wUlgo, and
then he will fight. I ask now, whether it is more certain and
definite that he mHJightj than that he will go 1 Or is it cer-
tain at all events that he will fight, and yet uncertain whether
he will go ? Open the Hebrew Bible any where, and examine
the tenor of the discourse. E. g. Is. 1: 19, * \f y^ fhall 6c

164 Hebrew Tenses, [Jak.

vnlling (^at(n tH), and mil hearken {'OS^^'OC^), ye shall eat
the sood of the land. But if ye shall refiise (^3fi!t^n tSM), and
shall be' refractory (crj'^nTa*!), the sword shall devour, etc/
But it would be a waste of time to adduce evidence here, which
every paragraph of the Hebrew Bible proflfers to our view.

Once more ; Ewald says that this form of the Praeter desig-
nates in a peculiar and appropriate manner, and indeed that it
is one of its principal offices to designate, actions which are re*
peated and continued^ {^ 480. 2.) Let us take, then, the
very example which he offers as confirming this, viz. ^ A mist
rt|jicni Ti\^^i went up and then it watered the face of the
ground, etc.,' Gen. 2: 6. Now here it is no more certain that
the mist watered the ground, than it is that it went up ; and
surely the action of watering was no more continued or hcintual
than the action of going up. The latter was the only ground
and cause of the former. Yet the going up is expressed by
the simple Future, used as a Praeterite, and the watering by a
Praeter with Vav before it, and employed in its usual Praeterite
sense.

In the same manner, it would be easy to shew, are number-
less cases of the Praeter with Vav construed ; and the ques-
tion, whether they are to have a praeterite sense or a future
one, is decided, as seems plain to me, not by the fact of being
prefixed by a Vav, but by the sense of the verb which pre-
cedes at the commencement of the sentence or the clause in
which they stand. For illustration, I refer the reader to the
cases just produced above, from Is. 1: 19, where the Future
form with a future sense precedes, and therefore the Praeter
with Vav which follows has a future sense with a praeterite
form. Long ago, indeed, was this remarked, and established,
as one might think, by Hebrew grammarians ; but Ewald has
strong desires to exhibit something ' new under the sun.' Yet
new things are not always true things ; and most palpably, here
his distinctions are made without a difierence for their basis.

There is room for criticism, on nearly every position which
he advances, that has any thing peculiar in it. Not that I dis-
pute the fact, in any case, that the different forms of the tenses
do in more or less instances designate ideas such as he assigns
to them. This is not his error. It consists in making them
mark peculiarly or exclusively such ideas, and the consequent
(at least the implied) seclusion of other forms of the Hebrew
verb from performing such an office.

1838.] Hebrew Tentes. 165

How easy now to reverse the whole process, and throw back
on him the burden of proof! If I should say, that the simple
Future denotes appropriately such action as is habitual and
often repeated, I could advert to numerous examples in the
Hebrew Bible, as every critic knows, by which I could confirm
my position. Suppose then I assume the position, that this is
the distinguishing and characteristic trait of the Future, and
aver that all other forms of verbs which designate the same
sense, such as the simple Praeter, and the Praeter with Vav,
do it accidentally and by a kind of enallage in usage, etc ; why
is not my ground in all respects as firm and tenable as that of
Prof. EwaJd ? I cannot see why it would not be so ; nor do- 1
apprehend that my error could be made more palpable than his.

Such is the result of a brief examination of this celebrated
Hebrew critic, in relation to this highly interesting and impor-
tant topic of Hebrew Grammar. His views are novel, in some
respects ; not as to facts, but as to the alleged reasons or grounds
of them. Every thing is reduced to theory ; and theory has
an all-pervading and overpowering influence. Hence the at-
traction which his Grammar possesses for a certain class of the
German critics. The inclination of a large portion of literati
in Germany is strongly set towards theory in every thing.
Even when it degenerates into mere imagination and conceit, if
it be ingenious, it does not seem to stand in the way of many,
nor to be the less acceptable. And so here, in the case of
Ewald ; his Grammar is, in the eyes of many, an absolute nan'-
pctreil of perfection. Gesenius, and all who have preceded or
followed him, with the exception of Ewald, dre tame, dull, old-
fitshioned writers, who have advanced no further than agere
actum. It is the theory of this new adventurer, which has be-
come in grammar, what the Pritudpia of Newton b^ame in
philosophy. When one contemplates facts like these, how can
he help thinking of what Madame de Stael has so characteristi-
cally said of the Grermans : ^' The Englishmen live on the
water; the Frenchmen on the land; but the Germans-— in
the air.''

In our own country too, the same changes have been occa-
sionally rung, and in quarters where the doctrines of past ages
do not often meet with a ready abandonment. We have been
told that '^ Gesenius has already become antiquated ;" and when
this has been doubted, and a venture made to eall it in question,
with an appeal to ftcts, then we have had an earnest and hearty

166 HebreUif Tema. [Jan.

defence of sucb a position. Yet after all, the arguments em-
ployed in this defence, have been deduced only firom what was
before conceded, viz., from the favourable opinions of a certam
class of critics in Germany in respect to Ewald ; and in this way
a confirmation of the declaration respecting Gesenius has been
attempted. ' Si non Superos — Ax;heronta movebo.'

I grant that there are such critics. But are not the like things
to be found in all— -or nearly all — ^the other branches of litera-
ture in Germany. Where is Kant now ? Or Fichte, or Jacobi ?
And where will Schelling and Hegel be, the next generation ?
It does not come with a very good grace firom those, who keep
on with such anxious solicitude in the paths of 1520 — 60, and
hereticate all who take the liberty of retreating merely now and
then into some small nook which diverges fit>m the old road,
either for the purpose of rest or refi^shment under some invit-
ing shade there, to strike off with sucb velocity into the mazes
of a comet, which leads so far beyond the boundaries of our
*^ visible and diurnal sphere." — Sed — manum de tabula.

A few suggestions more, and I have done.

It has been often said, and with much truth, that it is easier
to pull down a building than to erect one. It may seem to the
reader, perhaps, that I have been merely engaged in the work
of demolition, and that, even if I have succeeded, I have not
proposed any other theory in the place of Ewald's. This is
partly true. My positions have only been of such a nature, in
general, as to shew that my views differ widely firom his ; not
as to simple &cts, but as to the mode of accounting for them.
But still, bv all this the way has been prepared, as I would
&in hope, for the introduction of a few remarks, which belong
rather to the category of the thetiCf than that of the antithetic*

I begin then by remarking, that an attentive examination of
the €u:ttial use^ (not the theory), of the Hebrew tenses has led
me unavoidably to the conclusion, that while there are definite
and distinct uses of the Praeter as such and of the Future as
such — so definite in certain cases that no other form could be
employed — yet there is a wide and broad ground in which the
form of the verb, whether Praeter or Future, with Vav or with-
out, is treated in a manner altogether aaristiCf i. e. unlimited
as to ti$ne, and the sense in this respect is to be gathered fit>m
the context and the strain of the discourse. Take the same
narration, or the same strain of prediction, and you will find
aimple Praeter and Future, relative Praeter and Future, and

1838.] Hebrew Temes. 167

Participle abo, all employed to express the verj same relations
as to time. This cannot be denied ; and no tenuous distinc-
tions between the one and the other will abide the test of crit-
ical scrutiny, llieory may make dbtinctions ; but plain com-
mon-sense reasoning will not sanction them.

I would lay it down then as a rule of great extent, for the
interpreter oi the Hebrew, that he is to look to the context^ and
to that in connection with the nature of the case, in order to
determine by what tense he shall render the Hebrew verb,
when any doubt arises. I venture a remark, too, on this rule
which some will be ready to assail as too indefinite ; and this is,
that there is not one case in a hundred, where the reader of
Hebrew will ever doubt for a moment by what tense he is to
translate a verb, let the ybrm of it be what it may%

I have tried the experiment many scores of times, even with
tyros in Heblrew. I have asked them : Do you find any difil-
culty in knowing by what tense you must translate a Hebrew
verb ? The answer has neariy always been : None. And so
it must be, in the great mass of cases which are presented in the
Hebrew Scriptures.

If this is so easy, then, even for a foreigner and a compara-
tive stranger to the Hebrew, how much easier must it have
been for a native ? The doctrine of Greek quantity in the
tragic poets, and even the epic, is difficult enough for a student
of the present day ; but the great mass of an Athenian audience
at the theatre, would detect in an instant the smallest errors in
quantity or in accent. A native Hebrew would in like man-
ner, when taught by practice, manage as well with his five foims
of tenses, (if indeed there are so manY)> as a Greek would with
his wonderful apparatus of tenses and modes.

The fact that there are but two substantially different forms
of tense in Hebrew, (if we exclude the Participle from being
ranked as a tense), does in itself offer evidence to the mind, that
the Hebrews must have given these two different forms a great
latitude of meaning. One cannot even imagine that there can
be any great difierence of conception in the human mind, or
among different nations, about the modes of action. All nations
must have verbs that designate, either by form or usage, posi-
tive and conditional action. They must in some way too be
expressive of time past, present, or future. If they have not
theybmu adapted to express all this, then it must be left to the

i68 Hebrew Tenns. [Jan.

surroundiiig ^xilext to point out such an bterpretatiaii of the
verb. And this, in most cases, is a thing so obvious^ that many
of the Greek tenses seem to be almost superfluous. In fact
actual usage made them so. In the active and middle Toices,
for example, we have never but one future which is^ actually
employed ; comparatively seldom is it in the Passive, that more
than one Futute is actually in use } and of the Aorists scarcely
'Cver more than one is employed as belonging to one and the
same voice* Even the use of the second Aorist in the passive
voice, renders it decisive that no second Aorist active is or can
be employed of that same verb ; and the remark is altogether
common among grammarians that no Greek verb, or at most,
scarcely any one, in the whole language, ever employs all its
modes and tenses.

Yet all tlie various significations that needed to be expressed
were expressed by the few tenses only, which are in many in-
stances employed. So true is this, that the verbs mostly in
common use, such as olda^ yivoftM, igzofim, il^il, y&puenw, etc.,
are almost without exception those which are most defective,
and have the fewest forms. This is demonstration that the
want of the power of expression was not felt, when the number
of forms employed was quite small.

Thus also was it, doubtless, with the Hebrews* They had
hoi two distinct forms of tense ; and in thb respect we may say
their verbs wore inferior in their structure to those of the occi*
dental languages. But then, before we pass sentence upon
them as a wholes we .must take into view the Piel and Pual,
the Hiphil, Hophal, and Hithpael forms of the verb, which gave
variety and intensity of signification to it such as our language
cannot at all reach with their verbal forms, and scarcely attain
with our ample apparatus of adverbs.

In respect to these various methods and ways of conveying
^significations, different languages throughout the world vary
ifom each other. Yet after all, the essential and substanUal
part of verbal significations must be alike in all languages, be
;their forms more or less in respect to number.

As a further proof how little of absolute neces»ty there is of
.so many variations as the Greek (for example) employs, con-
sider for a moment the variety of meanings attached, as all now
concede, to the Infiniti/oe absohUe of the Hebrew. Here oHe
form only may designate every mood, tense, number, gender,

188B.] Hebrew Temes. 169

and peisoD. Did the Hebrews feel any embarrassment or un-
certainty in thus employing it ? None whatever, I apprehend ;
for we feel none now in thus interpreting it.

But I shall be inquired of here, no doubt, by such as may
hesitate respecting some of these positions, how it comes about,
that the Praeter and Future could sometimes be distinctively,
appropriately, and even antithetically used, and yet at other
times mei^d as it were in one common and indefinite usage,
and appropriated to designate the sense of all the tenses ? How,
it will be said, can any reader know when one of these usages is
to be adopted, and when another ?

The answer is easy. How can any one know when Q^n ,
for example, has (in Kal) an active sense, and when a passive
one ? In other words, how can he know when to translate it
to exaltf and when to be exalted 7 The form is identical, the
conjugation the same, in both cases. Yet the reader has no
difficulty in either case. The context and the exigency of the
passage always give him the obvious clue to the meaning in
any particular instance.

So was and is it with the Hebrew tenses. The context, the
relation of the clause, the exigency of the passage, point us at
once to the sense ; just as when the Infinitive absolute is em-
ployed, the question how it is to be understood is solved at
once by the circumstances in which it is employed.

Nor is this usage singular or strange, which gives to the Prae-
ter and Future at times a sense wholly diverse, and in some re-
spects even opposite, while at other times and in other circum-
stances their meanings are identical, or at any rate so nearly so
that no specific difference can be fairly pointed out. We may
take, as an exhibition of the like principles, some of the Greek
particles ; e. g. xa/ and ^/. Both are often employed as par-
ticles of transition from one sentence and subject to another, in
the thread of discourse, and yet of connection between the same.
Both indicate continuity of thought and representation in some
respects, while they pomt out diversity or separation in some
others. Yet di b never employed as a copula in connecting
several Nominatives, for example, or subjects of a verb togeth-
er ; here the office of xa/ or some equivalent (as xi) is exclu-
sive ; nor is ii employed in connecting the predicates of a sen-
tence together, or the objects which follow a transitive verb.
While diese two particles, then, occasionally, and even often-

VoL. XI. No. 29. StSt

170 Hebrew Temu. [Jait.

times, occupy common groudd, they diflkr widely in many
spects.

So it is also with many other words ; e. g. ii and /ap, etc*
So is it, too, with many nouns, verbs, and adjectives. In some
one of their meanings they become synonymous with some other
words ; in other meanings they are widely discrepant. If you
ask, how then can they be distinguished ? 1 answer, by the
tenor of the discourse and the nature of the case where they
are employed.

I can therefore imagine no serious difficulty in the war of the
supposition that has l^en made, viz., that the Hebrew forms of
tenses could be employed, as occasion required, in every sense
as it regards the expression of time.

The very fact that the Hebrew had so few formsof tense, oUi*
ged him thus to do. Just as the imperfect verbs of the Greek
obliged him to use the Imperfect, or the Perfect, or the Aorist,
as the case might be, for all the Praeterites ; and the second
Future Middle for all the active Futures. Was his discourse
rendered obscure by this ? I trust not.

Our subject should not be dismissed, however, without some
remarks on that " Proteus" Vav, which so commonly desig-
nates a Praeterite sense by a Future form, and gives to the
Praeter a Future sense.

The common theory in respect to the -i prefixed to the Fu-
ture, is detailed in all the recent Grammars. The substance of
it is, that this is a relic of ni 17 to he, and that the Future is in
reality constituted, when o is prefixed, by two forms of verbs ;

so that ^01^72 = -^R*! ^H. i- ^' ^ ^^ [that] he wtndd kill.

In respect to the Vav before the Praeter, this origin is not
pretended by Gesenius and others who follow him. Here 1 is
the proper conjunction ; while still a change is wrought in the
verb, both as to the place of its tone, and as to the time which
it designates*

Ewald, as stated above on p. 147, derives the *i of the Fu-
ture relative from .ITri . Still neither this method', nor that of
Gesenius, accounts for all the phenomena. When Gesenius
refers us to the kindred languages ^Lehrgeb. p. ^293), viz. the
Syriac and Arabic, for examples ot Futures with a Praeterite
sense formed by the help of the verb to be, he does not account
for all the difficulty of the matter in Hebrew. How comes it, I
ask, that Vav before both the Praeter and Future always bears
the signification of and, or at any rate of the Hebrew \ con-

1838.] Hebrew Tentei. 171

junctioo ? There is do difierence, moreover, id this respect be-
tween the Praeterite and the Future, in regard to the Vav he-
ibre them. But in the kitidred languages, the verb to be does
not, when employed in a composite tense, convey a copulative
meaning. The analogy then feils here, in an essential point.

I am inclined therefore to the opinion, that neither Gesenius
nor Ewald has hit upon the true theory. I must, on the whole,
regard i as a copulative, both before the Praeter and the Fu-
ture. And this I must believe, with my present views, notwith-
standbg the di^rence in punctuation or vowels. Before the
Praeter, the first letter of which has a broad vowel belonging to
it, there is no occasion usually to alter the Sheva under 1 copu-
la. Before the Future the case is different. Many Futures
begin with a Sheva under the Praeforraatives, e« g. in Piel and
Pual. In others the vowel is only factitious, and in Kal, etc.,
it is short Hhireq which is not well adapted to follow Vav pre&
with Sheva. Here then the Vav adapts its punctuation to the na-
ture of the case, as prescribed by the laws of euphony. Nor is
this strange. Before Gutturals with composite Sheva, i copula
takes the corresponding short vowel, as inri . Before' a letter
which must retain a Sheva vocal, 1 copula goes into ^ . Why
not then, as euphony would demand, suppose that 1 copula be-
fore the •; or the '^ of the Future, goes into "i , i. e. Vav with
Pattahh and Dagnesh, merely to facilitate the pronunciation of
these two very feeble letters, which so often are thrown to-
gether ? I do not vouch for the certainty of this ; but when we
consider that the meaning (and) is retained in all such uses of
the Vav, both before the Praeter and the Future, I can account
for this in no satisfactory way, without supposing the Vav to be
a copula in all these cases.

If any one should be disposed to urge the difficulty of the
Daghesh forte which appears after Vav in the Future, I would
ask him, whether he is a stranger to the frequent employment
o( Daghesh forte euphonic in the Hebrew language.

Be this speculation however as it may, whether well or ill
grounded, the fact of an alteration of tense in the Praeter and
Future by means of Vav, lies wide and broad, and plain to our
view, over the whole extent of the Hebrew Scriptures. In this
simple and easy way did the Hebrew increase the variety of his
forms of verbs — a variety with which declension would not fur-
nish him. In this way, viz. by choosing between four different
forms for a past tense, and four for a future one, he could main-

172 Hebrew Tensts. [Jaw.

tain a greater variety in the mode of expresnng the past or the
future, 4han either we, or even the Geeeks, have ever been able
to reach.

Let me not be understood to say, that all these fojrms are
employed promiscuously or ad libitum. By no means. Deli-
cacy and propriety of expression did not at all admit of thb ;
nor can I doubt in the least, tliat there was some definite reason
in the mind of the Hebrew, whenever he employed one form
rather than another, arising either out of the agreeableness of
variety, or out of the circumstances of the case, the mode and
form of the expression, the antecedence of adverbs, subjects to
verbs, qualifying clauses, particles, or somethbg of the like na-
ture, which always rendered it a matter of propriety and ele-
gance to choose this and refuse that. But how far these mat-
ters went, and where they reached the metes and bounds which
limited good usage, has not yet been sufficiently investigated, cer-
tainly not disclosed. Ewald has given some fine hints in respect
to many particulars. 1 wish most sincerely that such a writer as
Gesenius would pursue the subject, and give us something more
definite, palpable, intelligible, and well-grounded.

But there may be some of my readers, who will be disposed
to say, that ' my view of the Hebrew tenses is too much like
Father Simon's picture of the Hebrew language ;' who in order
to give the mother-church at Rome the right of making her
own interpretation of the Scriptures, maintained, that because
the Hebrew language every where presents words which have
several different meanings, there never can be any certainty as to
any one of these. The clmrch therefore must decide which of
these meanings shall be adopted. So here ; if the Hebrew Fu-
ture may become a Praeterite and a Present, and so mutatis otu-
tandis of the Praeter, then he will exclaim, ' we have a nodus
deo vii%dice dignus^ — and to which of all the powers above or
below shall we make the appeal ?'

Such, 1 say, may be the views of some ; for such views have
been often presented to the public. Yet a Uttle experience in
Hebrew and some tolerable knowledge of other languages, will
soon quiet any apprehensions in relation to this difficulty. I
have already remarked, that in translating the Hebrew the dif-
ficulty is scarcely felt, even by a tyro ; so easily does the con-
text determine what must be tiie tense by which we should
translate the verb. But if there be a difficulty still, it belongs
also in no small degree to the other sacred language, vi%. the
Greek, as well as to the Hebrew.

1838.] Hebrew Temes^ 178

Need any weU-infonDed Greek scbolarbe tdd, that the inter-
change or enaliage of tenses is a phenomenon far enough from
being uncommon in the Greek ? For example ; the Present is
used for the Praeter and for the Future. It sometimes supplies
the place even of the Imperfect, with its peculiar signification.
The Imperfect is sometimes employed for the Aorists, and for
the Presept which denotes duration ; the Perfect is employed
as an Aorist, and often for the Present ; — the Aorist is not un-
frequently used for the Pluperfect, for the Future, and even for
the Present ; the Future is used for the Present, and often to
designate, not what wiU be done, but what ought to be done.
It would prol<»ig the present discussion beyond aliproper bounds,
for me here to exhibit a detailed proof of all this. 1 must refer
my readers, therefore, to my N. Testament Grammar, ^ 125 ;
to Matthiae's Greek Grammar, Syntax, ^ 500 seq. ; and to
Winer's New Testament Grammar in relation to the use of the
tenses. If he consults all these sources where examples are
presented, no doubt can any longer exist, that such usages are
spread far and wide over the domain of the Greek language ; I
will not say, so far as in the Hebrew, but I will venture to say
— much further than any inattentive observer would even sus-
pect.

Yet no one complains of the obscurity and ambigmty of the
Greek on this account ; and for a good reason, because little or
no obscurity arises from this source. The context forces the
true sense upon the mind of the intelligent reader.

So was it, as I fully believe, with the Hebrew. He could
manage as well, with his two original fonns of tense, and the
two adjectitious ones made by prefixing i (the leading design of
which was for the most part to make the appeal to the preced-
ing context^, and also the Participle and the Infinitive Mode,
to express nb views intelligibly and plainly, as we can with all
our apparatus of may and can and shall and mil and ought and
flittt^ and should and could and would. That his language was
more brief and energetic than ours, follows as a matter of course.

We abide then by the old theory of the Hebrew tenses, at
least until we obtain a better one. If Ewald's theory is true,
it will not help us any in translating or even in understanding
the Hebrew. It will embarrass us, on the contrary, in multitudes
of places, because we shall be unable to reconcile them with it.
Yet, with all my conviction that Prof. Ewald has failed to sat-
isfy the just demands of philology, in the exhibition of hb views,

174 Pvblic LOrariei. [Jan.

I pay bim the tribute of acknowledgment in respect to ingenuH
ty and independence of mind. But 1 cannot go voluntarily into
the dark path whither he invites me, until he lights up at least
some brighter lanterns, or else brings the sun-beams to shine
upon it.

ARTICLE VIII.
Public Libraries.

B7 Robert B. Pattoa, Profftiaor of Oraok Litaratura ia the University of New Yorli City.

It cannot be doubted that the limited usefulness of our uni-
versities and colleges, and the circumscribed range of the stu-
dies and literary productions of their professors, are owing, in
a great measure, to a deficiency of that invigorating intellectual
aliment, which a large Library is intended to supply. The
private studies of the professors cannot have that ample range
which is necessary to give to their departments the interest and
variety of which they are susceptible. Our public libraries,
generally speaking, are not adapted to the present improved
condition of the departments over which the professors preside ;
but present a condition of things far below the interesting point
to which they have been raised by the elaborate researches of
European scholars, the results of which are deposited on the
shelves of transatlantic libraries. No wonder, then, that our
professors shrink from an attempt so manifestly beyond their
means to accomplish, and confine their literary label's to the
most elementary productions. To the want of adequate libra-
ries of reference, and not to an indifference to the great interests
of literature and science, we must, in justice, attribute the much
regretted fact, that our professors, who are not wanting, we be-
lieve, in talents or industry, or enterprise, are slow to venture
into the arena of learned and profound authorship. We could
present the names of more than one of our literary men, who
have wept in secret over tliis desolation ; — who have travelled
through the length and breadth of the land, to obtain access to
some important work of reference, to enable them to put forth
a work worthy of their station and the present condition of their

1888.] FiiHc lAbrariti. 17S

respecdve departments, and have returned to their homes in
disappointment and despondency, abandoning for the present all
hope of accomplishing their nohle undertakbg.

On the other hand, those who superintend the training of the
youth in our universities and colleges are aware of the fact, that
the most active and highly gifted minds among the students,
having easily mastered the common course of instruction, and
having nothing to invite them into the vast field beyond, sink
into indolence, and not unfrequently into vice.

It is frequently asserted that the American people are emi*
nently '^ a reading canmunUy.^^ The truth of the remark is
incontrovertible ; and while we deplore the limited range of
studv and effort to which our literary men are necessarily con-
fined, and acknowledge our vast inferiority to the countries of
Europe on the score of public libraries and depositories of the
learning of by-gone ages, we cannot but exult in the fact, that
our private dwellings, whether in the crowded city, the retired
village, or the solitary abode of the adventurer in 'Uhe iar west,"
— fi:x>m the splendid mansion of wealth and luxury, to the
humble cot of indigence and toil — are furnished with popular
literary works, and those, too, for the most part, of a decidedly
moral and religious character.

This circumstance, for which we are mainly indebted to the
benign operation of our common school system, has already ex-
erted a propitious influence in familiarizing our whole popula-
tion with the advantages of literary culture, and in creating a
thirst for more extended knowledge and higher intellectual cul-
tivation. And what has been the result ? Our whole coun-
try, with but few exceptions, presents, as it regards our literary
culture, the aspect of an almost unbroken level. ^' So higk
shalt thou ascendy and no higher ^^ must be said to every as-
piring student, longing to reach the more elevated regions of
comprehensive and successful research.

Thus, if we mistake not, the very fact to which, as citizens
of this favored land, we point with honest exultation, as the
fruit of our free institutions, now calls upon us with a vok^ that
cannot be mistaken, to complete the noble structure of which
we have laid the broad foundation, by establishing a vast store-
house of learning, an ample library of reference, by means of
which the level of general information may, to a certain extent,
be broken up ; — not by depressing any portion below its ]Nres-
ent elevation, but by afibrding an opportunity for such portkxis

176 PMic Librariu. [Jah.

as may demand it, to raise themselves above the sunoundiDg-
crowd. And this, we contend, is the very essence of our liber-
al institutions — to furnish opportunities and facilities for a gen-
erous competition, and a free development of talent, in every
department of enterprise, whether physical or mental.

Again, the stupendous literary collections of Ekirope owe
their origin, or, at least, their present imposing chluracter, to
munificent royal endowments and princely patronage, or posi-
tive legislative enactments, adapted to the genius and character
of European governments, but which, we fear, will be looked
for in vain, under a government like that of which we boast.
One fact alone will show how such enactments and patronage
may gradually swell the size of a public library, and secure to
it the possession of the literature of the day in every depart-
ment. The fact alluded to is this, that the universities of
Oxford and Cambridge in England, and that of Edinburgh in
Scotland, are entitled, by the existing copy-right law of the
realm, to receive a copy of every printed work of which a
copy-right £3 secured. But how different in the aspect of our
political institutions ! The very feature of our political char-
acter in which, as Americans, we have occasion to exult, is at
variance with public endowments, foundations, or enactments,
except so far as the common weal is literally concerned, and
each individual member of the community, as well as the whole
mass of our population, is personally and vitally interested. This
broad line of demarkation, whose existence we should certainly
deplore, if we could avail ourselves of no other resources, but
which, under existing circumstances, we regard as essentkd to
our political welfare, constitutes one of our strongest arguments
in favor of the private munificence to which we appeal for the
accomplishment of this noble object. It furnishes even now
an imposing spectacle to the European statesman, to behold the
numberless enterprises in which our citizens cheerfully embark
their time and wealth and labor, calculated to promote the
moral and religious welfiire of our community, without a help-
ing hand or a cheering smile firom '^the powers that be."
Will, then, our citizens shrink from an enterprise which pro-
poses, as its aim, an elevated standard of literary character and
mtellectual worth throughout our country, — impressed as they
must be with the conviction that, if it be not accomplished by
private munificence, it will never be accomplished at all. We
may still be left to indulge our despondency, and weep over

1838.] Public Libraries. 177

the literarj desolation of this (air field, where learning and
religion, literature and the arts, might so easily find a com-
mon sanctuary.

Again ; it b obvious to the sagacious observer, that this
country is to become the seat of war between Christianity and
her foes, of every form and every degree of pretension. Already,
in fact, it is so. And Christians must be prepared to maintain
the externa) defence of our holy religion, by the same weapons
by which she ever has been, and will be assailed by her ene-
mies,— namely, those which are furnished by profound and
extensive research.

We wish, however, to direct the attention of our fellow-
citizens to arguments of a more specific character, and less
generally appreciated, derived from the peculiar and unrivalled
condition and prospects of our large commercial cities.

These cities, if we mistake not, are soon to be numbered
among the greatest commercial emporia in the world. And
what an assemblage of ideas crowd upon the mind in conjunc-
tion with this interesting supposition ! Who does not know
that a great commercial city cannot, in the nature of things, be
exclusively and merely a cammercicd city? A demapd for skill
in the various collateral arts, a thirst for general information, a
desire to gratify the innate sense of beauty in tl)e decorations
of our public and private edifices, public spirit, and an honest
pride ot character, — these are but a few of the concomitant
circumstances that necessarily call forth indefinitely the energies
of such a city, in every department of labor and enterprise, and
direct them far beyond the confines of mere trade and com-
merce.

To the population, then, of our cities, their resources, their
practical and ornamental arts, their intellectual and corporeal
industry, their literary and scientific culture, who will dare to
assign a limit ? What mind can comprehend, at one view, the
restless activity, the increasing ferment, the continual flow of
wealth, into these grand reservoirs and the countless streams
that shall again flow forth, in some form or other, as a blessing
or a curse, to every portion of our country and of the globe ?

To what, now, must we look, in conjunction with religion, to
preserve us fipom the dominion of error and infidelity, to create
and sustain a sense of our public dignity, to give efiSciency and
a laudable direction to our untiring enterprise, to raise us above
mere animal existence to the character and aspirations of an io-

VoL. XI. No. 29. 23

178 Public Libraria* [Jan.

tellectual coramuDitjr, to keep alive a spirit of bvention aod
discovery y and to feed the restless miDd with its appropriate
fbod ? What, in a word, is to resist the inroads of ignorance,
of vice, of error, of infidelity, of sensuality, of luxury— -of that
dark and dismal chaos of moral elements, that will bid defiance
to social order, wholesome subordination, and tlie restraints of
law ? Must we not give immediate heed to the intellectual
wants of our growing community ? Must we not make our
facilities for intellectual culture and literary excellence commen-
surate with our increasing mental activity and irrepressible ener-
gies ? In a word, must we not, promptly and energetically,
meet a want which has already, for years, been felt in our coun-
try of an adequate library of reference, — ample, easy of access,
sufficiently extensive to meet the varied demands for informa-
tion in every department of art, science, or literature ?

That we do not exaggerate our actual and pressing wants, as
regards the several departments of art, science, and literature,
will be manifest from the following statements, which we ven-
ture to make after careful calculation.

In order to place the department of Architecture on such a footing,
in a Library of reference, as to satisfy the generous aspirations of
our students and professors in that department, and enable them
to exert a benign influence on our cities emd country, we could
readily and advantageously dispose of the sum of $30,000 in the
purchase of works in that department alone . . ((30,000

Of this any competent bibliographer or well informed archi-
tect, may satisfy himself, by enumerating the principal and cost-
ly publications which now enrich the libraries of Europe. Un-
der present circumstances, the architectural student or professor
roust accumulate, at a vast individual expense, an architectural
library, if he hope to meet with ordinary success ; and the few
whose means enable them to indulge in this luxury, must, from
the nature of the case, indulge in it alone. The public cannot
profit by the presence of these works, except in a very remote
and scanty manner.

To place the increasingly popular department of Civil £n-
gineering^wiih its cognate branches, on the same footing,
we could advantageously expend the sum of . . $20,000

For the Fine Arts^ especially the remaining arts of Design

(a very extensive department), .... 50,000

For ChemUtry^ especially in its connexion with the arts, 10,000

1888*] Public Libraries. 179

For Oeohgy^ Mmerdlogy^ Metallurgy and Fbsstl and re-
cent Canehology^ 15,000

For Botany, . 15,000

For Zoology, including Mammalogy^ Ornithology, IcthyoU
ogy, EnUmology, and other branches (also a very ex-
pensive depaitment), . . ... . 50,000

For History, Civil and Ecclesiastical, . . . 40,000

For Mathematics, pure and applied, .... 40,000

For Natural Philosophy, including Astronomy, . . 30,000
For Moral Science, including Ethics, Political Science,

Natural Law and Political Economy, . . . 50,000

For Greek and Latin Classics, 40,000

For Hebrew and other branches of the Semitic stock, . 10,000
For other Oriental Languages and literature including the

Indo-Germanic stock, . . . . . . 10,000

For Modem Languages, including all the necessary helps, 40,000

For "Rhetoric, Criticism and Belhs Lettres, . 30,000

Amounting in all to . . , $500,000
If we add for books strictly professional, viz.

For Law, 100,000

For Theology, 100,000

FoT Medicine, 100,000

We have in all . . . $800,000

Which would be immediately required, in order to place all these
departments on even a respectable footing in a library of reference
such as our country now demands.

If therefore we wish to see our country as eminent for its
literary cultivation as it is for its enterprise in all the departments
of business — if we wish to see mind exerting its influence on
mind, by means of those associations for the promotion of sci-
ence and literature^ which are the chief ornaments of the cities
of Europe, — we must pi-ovide a great library for the suprply of
their daily intellectual food, and to nourish and invigorate their
energies. It is as impossible for such associations to exist,
much less to prosper and exert their enlightening and meliorat-
ing influence, without the proximity of such a library, as for a
community of workmen, employed on some mechanical labor,
to cheer each other in their toil, and advance their appropriate
work with a miserably contracted allowance of daily food. la
each case weakness, lethargy, dulness, starvation, and death
must ensue.

Again ; if we would render our country a favorite resort for

180 Public Libraries. [Jan.

literary and scientific men of other climes, — a circumstance
which eminently contributes to humanize, refine, and dignify a
community, — we must provide the necessary attraction-^^n am-
ple library — a grand store house of knowledge, to which even
the European scholar will feel it a privilege to resort.

Is it not, then, high time to commence this enterprise also,
and to give it a commanding rank, among the enterprises for
which our country has been so justly celebrated ?

Permit us here to state a few facts, serving to show the vast
inferiority of our country, as regards its provisions for the higher
intellectual wants and literary culture of the community.

The public libraries of the United States, embracing those
belonging to colleges, theological seminaries, city corporatk>ns,
companies and societies are rated as follows : — ^

Harvard University,

St Mary^s, Bait

Georgetown, D. C.

Yale,

8. Carolina, Col.

Bowdoin,

Columbia, N. Y.

Virginia, U.

Allegheny, Meadville,

College of N. Jersey,

Mount St Mary's, Md.

Brown U.

St Mary's, Barrens, Mo.

Union,

Hampden Sydney,

St Joseph's, Bardstown,

Dartmouth,

Amherst,

Columbian, D. C.

Williams,

Wesleyan U. Ct.

But^rs,

William and Mary,

Charleston, S. C.

Georgia U.

Alabama U.

* [The statement in relutioo to some of the colleger is rather low.
The total at Amherst is morci thaix 10,000; at Williams more than
6^000. Ed.]

ColL Libra.

StwdeiUt Libra.

Tout,

42,000

6,000

48,000

10,000

10,000

10,000

10,000

8,500

6,500

15,000

8,000

8,000

8,000

4,000

12,000

8,000

8,000

8,000

8,000

7,000

7,000

7,000

4,000

ii,ooa

7,000

7,000

6,000

5,700

11,700

6,000

6,000

5,500

8,000

13,500

5,000

5,000

5,000

5,000

4,000

8,000

12,000

4,000

3,000

7,000

4,000

1,000

5,000

3,000

1,500

4,500

8,000

3,000

3,500

3,500

3,500

3,500

3,000

3,000

3,000

1,500

4,500

3,000

3,000

1838.]

Greenville, Tenn.
St. Louis, n. Mo.
Waterville, Me.
Middlebury, Vt
Washmgton, Ct
Hamilton, ^
U. of P^nn.
Dickinson, P^.
St John% Annapolis,
Nashville U.
Transylvania, Ky.
Augusta, Ky.
Kenyon, Oh.
University of Vt.
Jefferson, Pa.
Washington, Pa,
Washington, Va,
N. Carolina U.
East Tennessee,
Centre Danville, Ky.
Greorgetown, Ky.
Ohio TJ. Oh.
Miami U. Oh.
Western Reserve,
Franklin, Oh.
Illinois Col.

Total, 232,500 55,400 267,900

We have enumerated fifty-two universities and colleges.
The whole number in the United States is said to be about
eighty. Assuming eighty as the number of the organized col-
leges in the United States, and allowing for the twenty-eight
not enumerated, an average of 500 vols, for each, we have for
these twenty-eight colleges the gross amount of 14,000 vols.
If we allow also 15,000 vols, for the student's libraries of whose
size we have no certain information, we shall then obtain the
gross amount of volumes in all the colleges, including student's
Ubraries in the United States, 316,900.

Of the fifty-two enumerated colleges six are under the

care of the Roman Catholics, with . . 42,500 vols.

Of the Baptists, four, with 20^

Of the Episcopalians, five, with .... 18,700

Of the Mfetbodists, four, with 14,500

Of the other denominations chiefly Congregational ists

and Presbyterians the remaining tUr^-three, with I92fi00

Pvblic, Ldbraries*

181

3,500

3,500

4,500

4,500

2,000

,500

2,500

2,000

2,500

4,500

2,000

1,200

8,200

2,500

2,500

2,000

2,000

2,000

2,000

2,500

2,500

2,000

2,000

2,000

2,000

2,000

,500

2,500

2,000

2,000

1,500

1,000

2,500

1,000

1,000

1,500

1,500

1,500

1,500

1,500

1,500

1,000

1,000

1,500

1,500

1,000

1,000

1,500

,500

2,000

1,000

1,000

1,500

1,500

1,000

1,000

1,000

1,000

182 Public Libraries. [Jan.

7%eologieal Seminaries,

Andover, 13,000

Gettysburgh, 7,000

Princeton, 6,000

Southern and Western Theol. Sem. • . . 6,000

Western Theol. Sem 4,000

Auburn, 4,500

Episcopal Sem. N. Y 4,500

Union Theol. Sem 3,000

Literary and Theol. Sem. Hamilton, . . . 2,500

Theological Seminary, Alexandria, . . . 2,000

Bangor, 2,000

Theological Inst. Newton, • . . . . 1,800

Theol. Sem. Hartwick, 1,500

Southern Theol. Sem. 1,500

Lane Seminary, . 8,000

Total, 67,800

We have here enumerated the fifteen principal theological
seminaries. There are said to be about thirty-five in all in the
United States. Allowing for the twenty institutions not enu-
merated, (some of which have as yet no libraries, or none dis-
tinct from those of the seminaries with which they are con-
nected), an average of 800 vols, each, which we cannot but
regard as amply sufficient, we have for these twenty seminaries
16,000 vols, which gives for the thirty-five theological semi-
naries of the United States, the gross amount of 83,800 vob.

Other Public Ubrcarits,

Philadelphia Library, 44,000

Boston Athenaeum, 29,000

New York Society Library, 25,000

Congress Library, 25,000

Charieston Society, 15,000

Boston Library, J 0,000

Worcester Antiquarian Society, .... 12,000

Baltimore Library, 12,000

American Philosophical Society, Philad. . . 10,000

Boston Society, 9,000

New York Historical Society, .... 10,000

Philadelphia Athenaeum, 7,000

New York Mercantile, 11,000

New York Apprentices' 11,000

Total, 290,000

1888.] PubUe Librarie*. 188

•

These it Is believed, are the principal public libraries of the
United States, belonging to city corporations, literary socie-
ties, or to other associations, amounting to 230,000. About
thirty additional libraries in various cities of the United States,
might be named embracing each a small number of volumes.
If we allow 1000 vols, to each of them (many of which will
doubtless fall short of this number) we shall have 30,000 vol-
umes to add to the above, making the amount of volumes, in
all the public libraries of this description, 260,000.

Thus ve have for the public libraries of the United States :

Belonging to Colleges 316,900

Theolomcal Seminaries, 88,800

Odier hbraries, . 260,000

Total, 660,700

These 660,700 vols, are found in about 200 libraries of
colleges, college students, theological seminaries, etc., and if
brought together, in order to form one library, would be reduced
to about 550,000 vob. by rejecting all copies excepting one of
works which would occur, some two hundred times ; some, one
hundred and fifty times ; some, one hundred ; sonie, ninety ;
some, eighty ; and some, fifty times ; and so on as we descended
from the common popular works found in every library, down
to those that are more rare and are met with only in a few.
Thb reduction is necessary in order to institute a just compari-
son with single libraries of Europe.

The principal libraries of Europe that contaiu more than
100,000 volumes are the following :

Royal Library of Paris, 400,000 vols.

Central Library of Munich, .... 400,000

Vatican, . 360,000

Imperial Library of St. Petersbiirgh, . . . 300,000

Imperial Library at Vienna, .... 300,000

University of Gottingen, 300,000

Bodleian Library at Oxford, .... 300,000

Royal Library, Copenhagen, .... 260,000

Royal Library, Dresden, 950,000

Ducal Library, Wolfenblittel, . . . . 310,000

British Museum, 200,000

Royal Library, Berlin, 200,000

Royal Library, Madrid, 200,000

St. Mary's, Venice, « 150,000

Bologna, 150,000

184 Public Libraries. [Jan.

Magliabecebiana Library, F1orehee» . 150,000

Cambridge, England, 140,000

Royal Library, Stuttgard, «... 140,000

Academical Library, Prague, .... 130,000

Naples, 130,000

Ambroaian Library, Milan, .... 120,000

Laurentian Library, Florence, .... 120,000

Lyons, . . 120,000

St. Genevieve, Paris, 112,000

Ducal Library, Weimar, . . . . 110,000

Ducal Library, Parma, . . . . 110,000

St. Petersburgh Academy of Science, . . 110,000

Ghent, 110,000

Grand Ducal, Darmstadt, ^ . . • 110,000

Bourdeaux, 105,000

Total, 5,797,000

Whole number of volumes in (tarty European libzaries

each containing more than 100,000 volumes, . 5,797,000
Number of volumes in all the public libraries of Ger-
many, including the Austrian empire and Prussia, 6,650,000
Number of volumes in all the public libraries of Paris, 1,330,000
Number of volumes in all the public libraries of Lyons, 600,000
Number of volumes in the public libraries of Marseilles, 150,000

Public Libraries of the city of New York^ viz.
New York Society, . . . 25,000

Mercantile,
Apprentices,
Columbia College,
Historical Society,
Episcopal Seminary,

11,000
11,000

8,000
10,000

4,500

Total, 69,500

From the preceding exposition it appears, that the whole
{lumber of volumes contained in about two hundred public li-
braries of the United States (amounting to 660,700;, barely
exceeds, numerically^ the number contained in the libraries of
the city of Lyons. And, if reduced to one library, would not
greatly exceed, in number of volumes, some of the first rate
libraries of Europe.

Again ; the whole number of volumes contained in all the
public libraries of the United States^ form but about the tenth
part of the number contained in the public libraries of Germany,
viz. 6,650,000 ; or about half the number contained in the pub-

1838.] Public Libraries. 185

lie libraries of Paris, viz. 1,330,000. In other words, the num-
ber of volumes belonging to the public libraries of the States of
Germany amounts to 5,989,300 beyond the number to be found
on the shelves of the public Ubraries of the whole United States.
So also, the libraries of the city of Paris alone, embracing
1,330,000 volumes, exceed those of the whole United States by
669,300 volumes. And the city of Lyons alone can boast of
nearly as many volumes in its public libraries, as would be fur*
nished by all the public libraries of the twenty -six United States.

Again ; the public libraries of the city of New York collec-
tively, amount to 69,500 volumes. If these 69,500 volumes
were brought together, assorted and arranged, rejecting dupli-
cates, etc. in order to form one library ; it would numerically
not much exceed the single library of Harvard University.

Again ; it appears that ail the public libraries of the city of
New York, will furnish about one ninth part of the number of
volumes embraced in the libraries of the city of Lyons ; with
which, in point of population, and devotion to manufactures and
commerce, a comparison may be instructively made ; and not one
half^s many volumes as are contained in the public libraries of
Marseilles, an enterprising commercial city, with a population
one half as great as that of New York.

If it be objected that the libraries of Europe have been accu-
mulating centuries upon centuries, and thus have swollen to
their present imposing size, we would remark, that the univer-
sity of Gbttingen dates its origin a century later than our own
Harvard, and is now one of the first institutions of the age, with
a library of 300,000 volumes ; while our venerable Harvard
has not yet been able to rise above its 42,000. The universi-
ty of Berlin was founded in 1809, and is now one of the most
distinguished of the univei-sities of Germany, with a library of
200,000 volumes. The library of the university of Bonn, char-
tered in 1818, already numbers 50,000 volumes, exceeding the
number of volumes contained in the library of Harvard Univer-
sity, that has just witnessed its second centennial celebration.

We ask, then, again, Is it not high time to commence an en-
terprise not merely noble and ennobling in itself, but really essen-
tial to the future prosperity, happiness and respectability of our
country ?

If there is a distinguishing trait of national character in the
American people, it is untiring energy. There is here an elas-
ticity of mind which, under the influence of our free institutions^

Vol. XI. No. 29. 24

186 Public Libraries. [Jan.

has both the opportunity and space to expand ; and under the
pressure of adversity, the power which exists in no other coun-
try, and under no other system, to resist and overcome obsta-
cles. Naturally connected with this is the conception of large
plans for the future. Every plan must, of necessity, be conceiv-
ed on a grand scale, or we fall below the standard of American
character. When we consider the amount of mind in active
exercise in the United States, at work for good or for evil, is it
not manifest that the food of mind ought to be of a quality and
quantity suited to the exigencies of the case ?

When the dearth of literary food in the country is considered ;
— ^when the facts are stated which show how far it is behind
some petty States, or even cities, of Europe, will the citizens of
the United States be alarmed at a proposition to make their
country the depository of the best library in the world ?

We should not feel ourselves to be worthy of the country in
which we live, could we consent to offer a little or contracted
scheme, for their approbation. Who can calculate the advan-
tages to this country of such a library ? Who can estimate the
effect on religion, literature, the sciences, the arts, on com-
merce, agriculture, manufactures, not of this country only, but
of the whole world ?

Lest, however, a feeling of discouragement should possess
our minds in view of the supposed amount of time necessary
for the accumulation of such a library, as is here contemplated,
judging, as we are prone to do, by the more tardy operations
of our transatlantic brethren, we are reminded forcibly of a fact,
which needs only to be mentioned in order to rouse our ener-
gies, and encourage a well grounded confidence of success.
*We allude to the circumstance that every enterprise, of what-
ever character, though pregnant with difficulties, and apparently
impracticable, has, when undertaken with the genuine Ameri-
can hardiness, and pertinacity, been brought to its accomplish-
ment with a rapidity, which, though nothing but the natural
development of vigorous faculties, under propitious circum-
stances, excites the amazement of every foreigner, who visits
our favored shores. Two years since, the devouring element
swept over acres of the crowded city of New York, and now
a vestige scarce remains of its awful ravages. The foreigner,
on his arrival asks to see the ruins of the great conflagration ;
but they ^^ are not.^^ The animated hum of business alone is
heard, and, in a few more months, the event itself will appear
like a vague dream, or a remote tradition.

1898.] Design of JTieQlogical Seminaries. 187

It must, therefore, be acknowledged that another distinguish-
ing trait of American character, is the unrivalled promptness
and rapidity with which even the largest plans are carried for-
ward to their accomplishment. The interval between the con-
ception and the execution, usually filled up with doubts, and fears,
tiiak and failures, hopes and anxieties, is here almost annihila-
ted by the absorbing energy with which we press forward to
the consummation.

Finally : Is there a spot on the surface of the globe whose
geographical position, whose facilities for intercourse with every
clime, whose easy, rapid, and comparatively cheap acquisition
of every foreign valuable article it seeks to attain, in a word whose
physical, commercial and political advantages call so loudly
and impressively upon its citizens, to make it the envied depot
not merely of every description of merchandise, but also of Ut-
erature, of learning, of science, of the arts, and of their insep-
arable and indispensable co-adjutor — an ample library ?

ARTICLE IX.
Design of Theological Seminaries.*

B/ the Ear. L. P. HtekolE, Proftnor of Didaotie Tb«olofy, In th* Wmiun Btmm

Collage, Hadaon, Ohio.

The great object before the church is the subjection of the
world to Jesus Christ. The chief instrument divinely appoint-
ed for this end is the holy ministry. God has given to it the
high commission to ^' disciple all nations," and each minister in
his own station is, as far as possible, to promote this object.
The obligation thus resting alike upon all, secures in the aggre-
gate the accomplishment of the ultimate end, in proportion to
their number and extension. No single station has a right to
urge its claims in competition with the interests of the whole.
If, in the enlightened observation of christian wisdom, the ulti-
mate design can be best promoted by the transfer of one man
to another station, this, and not the separate interest of any
place, roust bind the conscience and control the conduct.

* Thia article ww delivered by the author as an inaugural addreaa.— £d.

188 Design of Theohgical Seminaries, [Jan.

" The field is the world," and the injunction to " pray the Lord
of the harvest that he would send forth laborers into his hanrest"
has reference to the whole field, and not to any exclusively fa-
vored portion of it. The design of the christian ministry is the
conversion of the whole world to Christ.

The design of Theological Seminaries is to provide the most
efficient ministry for this purpose. The world is to be kept in
view, and a ministry best adapted to its entire subjection to God
is to be provided. I assume this proposition therefore as true

^THE GREAT DESIGN OF THEOLOGICAL SEMINARIES IS TO

FURNISH THE MOST EFFICIENT MINISTRY FOR THE WORLD.

The present purpose is to give an attention to the inquiry —
how shall this great design be attained ? The answer will be
given under a few general heads, and the whole subject follow-
ed through several particular deductions.

To provide the most efficient ministry for the world, theologi-
cal seminaries must labor

I. To extend and perfect theological science.

No new revelation is to be expected from heaven. Nor are
we to expect that any new fundamental principles will be dis-
covered, in the revelation which has already been given. The
sanctified minds of eighteen centuries have been devoutly di-
rected to the Bible, and it cannot be that any doctrines or du-
ties essentia] to salvation, remain yet hidden beyond the reach
of their researches. Such a supposition would be an impeach-
ment of the wisdom and sincerity of its divine author. The great
doctrines which compose the system of substantial Chris-
tianity can never be greatly modified by any subsequent in-
vestigation. These compose " the foundation of God," which
** standeth sure J'

But theology as a science is far more comprehensive. It in-
cludes not only the truths necessary to salvation, but many im-
portant and influential doctrines in addition. Every theological
system must contain much besides its fundamental principles.
Collateral doctrines and legitimate deductions, philosophical ex-
planations and practical results must all belong to the system,
and all be harmoniously combined and amply demonstrated.
In its perfect state the system must be inclusive of all truth which
belongs to theology. What has already been discovered must
be put in its proper place, and there must also be space enough
for the harmonious addition of all new truth which shall be
discovered in time and eternity. The right system must be

1838.] Design of Hieologiccd Seminaries. 189

competent to embrace all truth, and put aU truth in its right
place.

It is therefore clear that there is great room for improvement
in theological science. Not only is there more truth to be dis-
covered and systematized, but the definite shape and outline of
the system which shall include what has already been found, is
far from being satisfactorily settled. Two great general sys*
tems, the Calvinistic and Arminian, hold their place in the
religious world, and with their various modifications divide the
sincere and devout disciples of the Lord Jesus Christ. Both
include the truths of substantia] Christianity, and therefore in
the great essentials of salvation the sincere members of each
have but ^^ one Lord, one faith and one baptism." But be*
yond these foundation doctrines of a common salvation, they
each have a system of important truths which are widely dififer*
ent from each other. They involve different philosophical ex-
planations, and compel to the different interpretation of the
same texts of Scripture. Though they are each harmonious
with their own parts, yet are they so different from each other,
that both cannot be true ; and yet both, as to general system,
are so comprehensive that one of them roust be true. In this
one fact there is enough to convince us that theological science
is yet far fi'om its utmost attainable perfection. Who shall say
that it is a hopeless efibrt to find which of these is the true sys-
tem ? And who believes that this may not be so enlightened
and fortified by Scripture and reason, that in proportion as pre-
judice and party die, and an honest love of truth prevails, the
whole of Christ's " disciples indeed" shall be brought inteUigent-
ly and cordially to embrace it ? It is promised that such ^^ shall
know the truth, and the truth shall make them free." There
might still to different minds, be different modifications and ex-
planations of particular portions, but it would be substantially
the same general system. This can be done. DiUgent and
serious research will find truth enough to establish and con-
firm the right system, and send the false one to the oblivion
which now covers the exploded planetary theories of Ptolemy
or Tycho Brahe. *

* The words of the pious and learned John Robinson, who was
the pastor of the English church in Holland which sent the first col-
ony to the rock of Plymouth, and spread over this land the faith of
the puritans, are here highly appropriate. As the sails of the May-
flower which was to bear them across the ocean were spread to the

190 Design of Theological Seminariei. [Javt.

All science is subsidiary to theology. And at the present
day the votaries of science are pushing forward with ardor and
success in all the departments of human knowledge. The

K resent is a most auspicious time to advance theological science*
lany things conspire to elucidate the Bible. Pure truth yet
lies hidden in the exhaustless mine of revelation, and facilities
for bringing it forth to light multiply around us. Mental sci*
ence is improved, and the laws of the human mind are better
understood. The philosophy of language, and principles of
interpretation — ^the manners and customs, geogi*aphy and nat-
ural history of the nations of the Bible, are better known.
The discovery and examination of ancient monuments, cities
and sepulchres, with all their inscriptions, sculptures and hiero-
glyphics— ^the more attentive study of dogmatic history bring-
ing out and comparing former religious opinions — and espe-
cially the application of the truth and its results by missionary
efforts, in the case of great numbers and wide varieties of the
heathen — are all pouring their converging rays upon the sacred
record, and throwing a light upon every page, unknown since
the Holy Spirit inspired holy men of old to \^rite it.

Theological Seminaries are required to avail themselves of
all these advantages for better understanding the Bible, and

winds, be says — ^ Brethren, we now quickly part -— Whether I see
your faces on earth again the God of heaven only knowa Follow
nie no further than you have seen me follow the Lord Jesus Christ
If God reveal any thing to you by any other iostrutnent of his, be as
ready to receive it as ever you were to receive any truth by my min-
istry : for I am verily persuaded, I am confident the Lord hath more
truth yet to break forth out of his holy word. For my part I canaot
sufficiently bewail the condition of the reformed churches, who are
come to a period in religion ; and will go at present no fbrtber than
the instruments of their first reformadon. The Lutherans cannot be
drawn to go beyond what Luther said : whatever part of bis will oar
good God has imparted and revealed unto Calvin, they will ratber die
than embrace it ; and the Calvin ists you see stick fast where they
were left by that great man of God, who yet saw not all things. This
is a misery much to be lamented, for though they were burning and
shining lights in their times, yet they penetrated not into the whole
counsel of God, but were they now living they would be as willing to
embrace further light, as that which they at first received. Remem-
ber it — it is an article of your church covenant — ^ Be ready to reeeiot
uihalUver truth shall he made knotsn unto you froni the written tsord qf
43iodJ* Mather's Magnalia, Vol. L pp. 59, 60.

1838.] Design of Theological Seminaries. 191

apply the whole diligently to the extension of theological sci-
ence. It is essential to the training of the most efficient minis-
try for the world. An improved philosophy is subjecting the
world of matter to man ; and a clearer and more comprehensive
knowledge of the system of divme truth is also to bring the
heart and conscience under the power of the preacher. Any
fact, however minute, which places one text of Scripture in a
clearer light, is invaluable to the world. No finite mind can
predict its ultimate results. It is by this increased knowledge
of divine truth, that the church oi God in the latter day can
aflbrd to dispense with all the '^mighty signs and wonders" of
the primitive age.

II. To secure a thorough and specific mental discipline.

An academical course of study is designed for the general de-
velopment of all the faculties. The process of discipline in all
colleges should be adapted to call forth the energies of the whole
mind. Nor is there at present any probability that a more effi-
cacious course will be round, than the long tried and approved
system of thorough classical and mathematical training. But
when the mind is brought under the influence of the theologi-
cal seminary, though it should be allowed to relax none of its
energies, yet henceforth its training is no longer to be general
but spedfic. The object now is not merely a strong mind, but
an able minister — not generally, the capacity to strike hardy
but speei6cally, to know what to strike, and how to hit. It is
the want of this specific discipline, which leaves too many to
spend their lives in doing little else than '^ beating the air."

There must therefore be a course of discipline pursued with
specific reference to the peculiar object. It is a standing law
of dynamics, that all moving forces must be applied in the di-
rect line of their natural tendencies. You can accomplish no-
thing by working against nature. The water-wheel may be
mechanically perfect, but it will not move against the stream —
the machine will never reverse the direction of the power which
propels it. No skill of the mechanic can accomplish any thing,
m violation of this law of nature. Indeed all skill is found in
the most exact observance of it. But the laws of mind are as
constant as the laws of matter, and all successfiil action upon
mind must accord with them. Divine truth iias its own nature
— ^that which gives to it its specific identity — and mind has its
own nature ; and nothing will be gained by applying the one
to the other contrary to nature. God's Spirit does not subvert

193 Design of Theological Semnaries. [Jan.

his own laws in either the mind or the truth, when he renews
and sanctifies the mind through the truth. Man is no further a
successful instrument, or an effectual co-worker with God in
the salvation of sinners, than he exerts his agency in conformity
with these unchanging laws. No power of intellect or fertility
of genius can avail any thing in opposition. He must know the
nature of the material on which he works, and of the instru-
ment by which he works, and thus sdect with wisdom and ap-
ply with skill, or he will ^^ labor in vain and spend his strength
for nought."

It has been assumed, that the best way of gaining this practi-
cal wisdom in the ministry is by a process of instruction under
the direction of some wise and experienced pastor. The
success of such men as Hooker, Porter and others, has been
adduced in confirmation. But while it is admitted that there
must be wisdom and experience in all the departments of theo-
logical instruction, and that on this account it will be found a
matter of constant necessity, to supply theological seminaries to
a great extent from the pastors of the churches, yet there are
many considerations which go to prove, that the seminary, and
not the study of the private pastor, is the place to provide the
most efficient ministry for the world.

Few such men as those above referred to can be found ; and
if they were far more common in the churches, the vast accu-
mulation of ministerial labors upon settled pastors at the present
day would utterly forbid their assuming this additional burden.
The number of young men now preparing for the sacred office,
and the prospective demand of the world for many more, des-
troy all rational hope of supply from such a source. Besides,
the seminary is the best place for ministerial training. A broader
system is pursued and more helps are at hand — the stimulus
of numbers is felt, and opportunities of discussion and friendly
mental collision are afforded — and in the surrounding region,
especially among the new churches of the West, the calls for
biblical, catechetical, and Sabbath school instruction, and all the
facilities for social exhortation and prayer, and every practical
preparation for the ministry are far more abundant than any sin-
gle pastor's time, or library or parish can afford. It is the de-
sign to accumulate these facilities for thorough and specific dis-
cipline in theological seminaries, that they may apply them to
the great purpose of providing for the world, die most efficient
ministry which can be made out of fallen men.

1838.] Design of Theohgkd Seminariei. 19S

ni. To cultivate a spirit of warm, devotional piety.

Talent, learning, eloquence, orthodoxy, can never be made
substitutes for pietj. If the minister is not a holy man, all other
attainments are but so much power for evil. And if he is really
a converted man, while his piety is greatly alloyed by sloth and
idleness on the one hand, or rashness and blind zeal on the oth-
er, he had better betake himself to any other calling than the
sacred ministry. The man who ministers from God to dying
men must be deeply imbued with the spirit of Jesus Christ.
There must be habitual communion with God, a strong love for
souls, for the closet, for the Bible. This world of sensuality
and infidelity and idolatry is not to be brought back in allegi-
ance to God without a ministry whose piety is deep, decided
and ardent. Their lives as well as their lips must preach the
gospel. \

There is danger, that in acquiring other qualifications, this
essential one should be too much neglected. The awakened
energy of mind and ardor of investigation may restain the affec-
tions of the heart, and wither the christian graces. Every
seminary is bound to watch and pray against consequences so
destructive, and exert a direct influence upon the precious
youth within its walls to keep them near to God and ripe for
heaven. Piety will not advance without exercise. The heart
as well as the intellect must be cultivated. No matter with
what firmness of sinew and fulness of muscle the dry bones may
be clothed, if the warmth and vigor of the vital spirits are not
there, it is a lifeless organization — mere dead matter — fit only
for the sepulchre. A ministry for the church of God and the
world of sinners must glow with spiritual life and strength, or it
b good for nothing for either.

But besides this general method of answering the question —
bow shall theological seminaries secure their object ? — there is
an opportunity for a more particular consideration, by following
out some deductions from the main principle.

If it is the object of theological seminaries to furnish the most
efficient ministry for the world, then —

1. TTiey must he allowed the free investigation of the Bible.

Free inquiry is the natural right of the human mind. There
is no general principle within the range of human thought,
which the mind may not examine freely and fearlessly. The
Bible is as open to investigation as the book of nature. There
is a sacredness and solemnity in all truth wherever found, and

Vol. XI. No. 29. 25

194 Design of Theological Seminarie$. [Jan.

especially in the truths of revelation ; but there is nothing there
too sacred or too awful for human examination. A reverent
and humble spirit may fix its gaze on the hoHest mystery which
the Spirit of God has put upon the sacred pages. Let the man
" put his shoes from off his feet," and he may stand erect be-
fore the burning bush while the great " I am'* declares his awful
message.

Yea it is not only the right, but the duty of the human mind
to examine the Bible. God has bid us " search the Scrip-
tures/' and the obligation applies to all which the Scriptures
contain. Especially is this the duty of theological seminaries.
Minds are there trained who are to be "set' for the defence of
the Gospel," and they cannot defend it, if they do not under-
stand it. Mere authority in this age is good for nothing. Eccle-
siastical decisions can carry with them no force, any further
than they embody truth. No article of any creed can stand
any further than it will bear the most rigid examination. Noth-
ing which belongs to religion is to be kept in darkness, or at-
tempted to be sustained but by the power of truth. The opin-
ions of the fathers, the writings of the wise and good of former
days should be diligently consulted and carefully pondered. It
is but the arrogance of ignorance and folly which affects to de-
spise them as out of date and behind the age. But they are to
be regarded as teachers, not tyrants. It is the truth which they
contain, and not their age merely, which makes them venerable.
Whatever tliere may be in them which will not bear examina-
tion, is as worthless and as determinately to be rejected as the
errors of yesterday.

The ministry of the present age is called to meet every form
of specious delusion and sophistry and cavilling skepticism.
The votaries of sensuality and the worshippers of mammon
have a thousand deceitful hiding places. The heathen nations
have their long-used superstitions, and in many cases the most
subtle and elaborate systems of error ; while the Roman beast
and the false prophet have been deluding: the nations for ages,
and bound the human mind with fetters of iron. The men who
are to m<?et all this hostile array and subdue or annihilate it^
must not only be permitted, but trained to examine every thing
that belongs to it. Not only the substantial doctrines of reli-
gion and their common arguments of defence, but the whole
system of theology must be understood, with its modern objec-
tions and evasions and perversions, and all that philosophy or

1888.] Duign of Tkeologicdl Seminaries, 195

reason or the Bible can bring to bearoipon it« This is no time
to shrink from the collisipo of mind >yith mind-^-* of cAm^ion
mind with pagan mind — or infidel mind* The contest is
ak^ady begun ; the conflict is even now desperate ; neither the
friend nor the enemy of the Bible can draw back from the
shock of conflicting opinions and purposes. One or the other
must fall vanquished on the field, and yield the kingdom to the
conqueror. Let the Bible and reason have full scope — let
truth unshackled grapple with error — and it is not doubtful
which shall be victorious. Depraved and rebellious as man is,
there is that in Divine truth, applied by God's Spirit, which
reaches his conscience and subdues his stubborn will.

Theological seminaries are designed to raise up a ministry
adequate to the exigencies of such a crisis ; they must there*
fore be permitted to survey the whole field and every thing
pertaining to it. They should possess such a love to truth, and
such an honest mind in seeking it, that they can have no rest
in taking things upon trust, or covering ignorance by sophistry.
To such a mind ail truth is free, and all but truth is worthless.
The attempt to chain it by authority, or frighten it by preten-
sions of sacred awe and mystery, from looking or thinking upon
any truth of God, is high treason against the Bible under the
name of loyalty. You may as well say that there are some
substances too sacred for the chemist to analyze, or some par*
Uons of the heavens too holy for the astronomer to bring under
the range of his telescope, as that there are some portions of
the Bible too solemn and mysterious for the christian minbter
to examine. There are many things both in nature and reve-
lation which man will not comprehend in this life, but in this
&ct there is found no prohibition to push his researches to the
utmost limits, nor by devout efibrts to move that limit, if. he
can, much fMrther onward into the unexplored darkness, and re-
claim the region to the clear possession of human science. God
has set them both before us, and when we will, we may exam*
ine them. Those especially, who are set to prepare the Lord's
ambassadors, mmt examine, humbly, reverently, seriously,
but fireely and unhesitatingly, everything that is connected with
the sacred office. They must emphatically — ^' prove all things
and hold fast that which is good."

2. They must not foiter a sectarian spirit*

Different views of important doctrines, ceremonies, or modes
of government may give rise to separate organizations, with

196 Degign of Theological ScminarUs. [Jan.

their diflferent names, and thus perpetuate in the church different
denominations. No attempt in the present day to merge them
all in one is likely to prove either successful or salutary. Even
theological seminaries must be more or less denominational in
their sympathies and patronage.

But denominational peculiarities may become too prominent.
Notwithstanding an agreement in all that is involved in sub-
stantial Christianity, they may he magni&ed to matters of such
moment as to bar the way to christian communion and coope-
ration. It then goes beyond a separate organization, having a
common purpose though a different name, and becomes a sect —
a party cut off by its own exclusiveness, from the common
sympathies and fellowship of the general family of Christ.
Denominational distinctions are therefore expedients, and will
be perpetual, so long as there is a disagreement in important
principles. But sectarianism can never be justified by any dif-
ferences, while there is a union on the substantial doctrines
which are essential to salvation.

The ministry, from the very nature of their relation to the
church, must exert a controlling influence on this subject. If
they are divided into parties the whole church will in like man-
ner be broken up bto fragments. Oh ! how does infidelity
strengthen itself, and vice and irreligion abound, and all the woes
and cruelties of heathenism press upon the millions of its vic-
tims, while the church and the ministry are frivolously contend-
ing about mere sectarian distinctions. Those '* schools of the
prophets," where the minds of the future pastors of the church
are to be moulded, stand under fearful responsibilities to the
great Head of the church on this particular point. They
may explain and defend their denominational distinctions, but if
the spirit of sectarianism be there, it will difiiise the poison
through all the body. Their young men will go forth, with no
zeal but for their distinctive peculiarities, to distract the church
and disquiet the world with their bigoted notions, arrogant
claims and conflicting measures.

There may be differences of philosophical speculation, and
peculiarities in benevolent operations, and varieties of method
and form, which shall give to different seminaries their distinc-
tive characteristics. In this there is no ground of anxiety nor
complaint. But when any of these peculiarities are thrust for-
ward as matters of paramount importance, and made the strong
points of appeal to either popular favor or popular odium, it be-

1888.] Design of T%eological Sendnariei* 197

comes no longer honorable nor innocent. It is sectarianism
in its degraded fonn, doing its hateful work and exposing its
selfish spirit. The next downward step is to the use ofall the
catch^words and cant-phrases which are meant to mark the par-
ty and delude the multitude.

That high and holy effort, which seeks to furnish the most
efficient ministry for the world, can have no fellowship with
such unworthy expedients. Neither does the church nor the
world need any more new theological seminaries, whose foun-
dations are laid in popular prejudices, amid sectarian collisions,
clamoring for their share of the charities of the church on the sole
ground of their party organization. And that policy, which
seeks to build itself upon such local and factitious excitements,
is not only worldly and wicked, hut miserably short sightedJ
The flowing tide will soon ebb, and leave them standing high,
and dry upon the beach.

3. jUiey must not interfere in ecclesiastical govemtnent.

The professors in theological seminaries have as men all the
civil and social, and as ministers all the ecclesiastical rights and
privileges which others have. In proportion to their wisdom and
piety, their counsel and influence are valuable, m all these rela*
tions. But as professors of theology their sole business is the in-
struction and discipline of the precious sons of the church under
their care, to make them ministers such as the world needs. Their
connection with a theological seminary adds no prerogatives to
any other relation which they may sustain. As such, neither
singly nor combined have they any thing to do with the legis-^
lative or judicial affairs of the church. They are not set as
judges in Israel, nor as watchmen upon the walls of Zion.
The keys are not in their hands, — ^they have no power to bind
or loose. It is not for them to hunt out heresy, nor arraign or
expel it from the church of God. She has her own organiza-
tions for that purpose, and they are bound both to the church
and to Jesus Christ to be prompt and faithful. But in these
matters, theological seminaries have no right to interfere. It is
a direct violation of the apostolic injunction — " Let none of you
suffer as a thief, or as an evil doer, or as a busy body in other
men's matters.*'

The danger may not be very great, that theological semina-
ries shall publicly seize the sceptre and rod of discipline and
wield them directly over the ministry and membership of the
churches. But there are many ways of stepping quite beyond

198 Design of Tieologkal Semnariei. [Jam*

their sphere in these matters. They have facilities for a wide
spread influence upon other minds. Bj conrespondencey and
personal interviews, and occasional meetings, rumors may be
spread and prejudices excited and combinations formed against
an obnoxious man or measure or party, which may as effectual*
ly shape results and secure a desired issue as if they were upon
the judgment seat. Yea, when regular ecclesiastical trials
have issued contrary to their wishes, they may put all these
means in requisition to gain their sinister purposes in spite of
constitutional rules and christian order.

This is a direct usurpation of the authority of God^s house,
and involves the very essence of spiritual tyranny. No member
of a. theological seminary can use in this way the facilities of
his station for purposes of ecclesiastical discipline, with right-
eousness or decency. He was not put in that station for that
purpose. He is meddling with what belongs to others. He
is perverting that which was given to him for another object,
and committing an offence against the order and peace of the
church, for which there can be no other justification, than that
*^ the end sanctifies the means.''

4. 7%e^ must stand responMle to the enlightened sentiment
of the chrutian church.

There are various sources of supervision to which theologi-
cal seminaries may be made responsible. It may be directly to
the civil power — ^to a church judicatory — to a self-constituted
association — or to enlightened christian sentiment. Instances,
in this country and in Europe, may be found in all these varie-
ties ; and it is an open question — which is the best adapted to
their great design ?

Few probably in this country will be found in favor of direct
responsibility to the State, This may be tolerated in Germany
ana the different monarchical governments of Europe, but can
hardly consist with the genius of a free republic. Changing
polidcs and shifting majorities must cause such a perpetual inter-
ference in its plans and operations, as effectually to break down
its stability and power of doing good to the world.

Where the responsibility is to ecclesiastical authority, the
danger is much the same both in kind and degree. If sectarian-
ism did not control, and there were few liabilities to the .fluctu-
ations of party majorities, the evils would in proportion be few
and small. But when contentions and divisions occur, scarcely
less violent than in political parties, the institution itself must be

1838.] Design of Theological Semfutries. 1 99

agitated by the storms and tempests which are about it. Eve-
ry movement of the elements on which it rests is felt, and the
unity of its design, and the efficiency of its efforts must be disturb-
ed. This cannot be^the best position for any institution, which
is to regard the general good and labor for the whole world.

To be amenable to a self-constittUed body, itself a sect— se-
lecting its members on avowedly sectarian principles, and fenc-
mg itself round with sectarian regulations, can eventuate in
nothing else but a sectarian theological seminary.

But where as ministers, all are responsible to their own ec-
clesiastical organizations, and as professors, are held amenable
to a board of trust, which has its civil charter, giving plenary
powers of administration and perpetuation of their own body,
and then both its boards of trust and instruction amenable to
the enlightened public sentiment of the christian community^
we have all the security and effectual guardianship that can be
attained, without the dangers of sectarian influences and party
collisions. But it is the inttlli^ent christian public to which
it must be held responsible. The christian public are alone
interested, and the enlightened portion of it alone competent, to
decide in regard to its merits. In this way we have the same
security that we have for any free institution in the land. It
can prosper no further than they approve, nor become heretical,,
any further than they shall become the abettors of heresy. If
the wise and the good are satisfied with i^ they give it their
patronage and their prayers ; if they are dissatisfied, they with-
draw their influence and their support, and the institution dies.

That institution has the surest guarantee for its permanent
usefulness, which is entrenched in the judgment and afl!ectioii»
of the most intelligent, stable, and pious in the land.

5. Ecclesiastical bodies mast not grant licenses but at the
conmleiion of a full course of study.

The proper judicatories of the church are alone competent to
regulate this matter. Theological seminaries can do no more than
give their opinion and counsel. This however is plain, that,
without a mutual understanding and cooperatian on this subject, it
were far better to dispense with theological seminaries altogether.
They must be comparatively useless, and the expense of their
endowments thrown away, if the youth under their training be
hurried into the mmistry after a few months' attention to the
preparatory studies. If this is all that is requisite to fit a young
num for the most responsible of all stations, theo let not the

900 Detign of T%eohgical Seminaries^ [ Jak.

cbarch be burdened with the UDnecessary charge, wx mocked
with the expectation, that better education will make any bet-
ter ministry.

This is not the place to dwell upon the fallacy of such opin-
ions, nor to show that piety, though essential to the minbtry,
must nevertheless be accompanied with an enlightened and en-
larged understanding to fit them for their great design in con-
verting the world. Nothing can more effectually cut every
smew of her strength, and leave the church weak and de-
fenceless to every assailant, than the hasty admission of her
:8ons to the sacred ministrations at the altar. They must be
able to teach, and apt to teach, or they can only be ^* the Uind
leaders of the blind.^' And there is no patent process by which
you can work this aptitude into mind, without its own exertion.
There is no charm about any institution, or any boasted method
of quicker and better preparation, that is about to make men
*'' wise to win souls," without taxing their own energies, and
obliging them to think deep and study long and intensely.
There have been many such experiments, but they all fail, just
as common sense would have predicted, because they go against
nature. It is time the church had learned enough from her
own sad experience, to be never deluded again by such misera-
ble pretensions. Until the young man is well prepared for the
sacred office it is no help to the church to induct him into it.
By no means is it so much the number, notwithstanding all her
waste places, as the qualifications of her ministers, about which
the church ought to be deeply solicitous. Much is gained,
in the case of every hasty young man, who is kept for a year
-out of the pulpit and at his proper studies. He is thus pre-
pared to do something henceforth to the purpose, and the church
IS saved from the withering influence of a whole yearns crude
ministrations and rash measures. A full course should be in-
sisted on, and no exceptions should ever be tolerated which
would weaken the general rule. Intended kindness to the in-
dividual is treachery to the cause of religion.

6. T%e number of theological seminaries may safely be left
4o the results of fair competition.

The present tendencies doubtless are to an inordinate multi-
plication of them. The claims of the world and the eflbrts of
the church to meet them would of themselves augment the
number, and then the^e comes in all the additional incentives
iirom local interests, sectarian zeal, and party prejudices. Dread

1888.] Design of ITuohgical Seminaries. 901

responsibOities rest upon those who engage m the establishment
of new institutions. Much time and labor, money and talent
must be expended upon every such object, and if it was not
needed tbe whole has been perverted, and the prime movers
stand responsible to heaven for it.

But to God alone must this responsibility be left. It is not
for man to arraign and try their motives and estimate their guilt.
The church has only to determine her own wants in this par-
ticular, and this it will do. Those institutions which are need-
ed will be sustained, and all which are found useless will of
course fall. No local interests or factitious excitements can
long avail to keep in existence that which is not needed. A
discerning public will eventually determine which ought to live
and which ought to die. And while the individual responsibil-
ity is to (jod, the decbion of life or death to the institution is in
the intelligence of the church to determine which and what are
fulfilling the great designs of God. The end in view is an effi-
cient minbtry for the world — not for a sect — ^not for a local ob-
ject— not as the fruits of a transient excitement — but far a world,
and untU a world is brought back to God's allegiance. The
seminary must therefore lay its foundations broad and deep, and
its plans wide and extensive, looking not at the interests of a
year or an age, but onwards till the millennium. Results per-
manent as truth, broad as Adam's dying race are to be gained,
and that institution, which looks with a steady eye and holy
aim to these enduring interests, will find its sure support in the
permanency of the principles which it has consulted. The timid
and the time-serving may come and go, applaud and revile,
but the enlightened and the wbe will give to it their confidence,
their patronage and their prayers. Tremendous as the respon-
sibility b, upon those who engage in the new enterprise, if their
honest aim b the good of the world and the glory of God, and
their measures are wise to win the end, the issue has nothing
for them to fear. Their work will stand and prosper, while a
thousand splendid projects and gilded bubbles burst around
them. The event may be safely left to the decbion of the
Lord and his people.

7. 7%fy must be the subjects of the unceasing prayers of
the church.

God, and not man, will have the glory of the world's subjec-
tion to Jesus Christ. It b to be e&cted '^ not by might, nor
by power, but by my Spirit, saith the Lord." Nothing can be

Vol. XL No. 29. 26

90S Design of Theological Seminanei. [ Jak.

more certain, than that God will blast all the undevout projects
and expectations of his professing children. Especially upon
theological seminaries must there be a constant descent of the
dew of heaven. The board of supervision — of instruction —
the youth who are instructed — all must feel the moving influ-
ence of the Holy Spirit, or no good will result to Zion. And
this influence is given '' to those who ask himJ* And while
those connected with the seminary should '^ pray without ceas-
ing," it is the special duty of tlie church to remember these
^'schools of the prophets" daily. They are not to be expect-
ed to prosper, unless your prayers abound. They are your
instruments for the world's conversion — your instruments to
teach and to train up a pious and efficient ministry for the
world, not to do your work oi prayer and supplication^ God's
blessing will not then be added without your prayers. Better
forget almost any other instrumentality in your visits to the
throne of grace, than your sources of theological instruction.
Here are some of your most precious jewek ; the hope of the
world ; the whole dependence under God for filling up your
foreign and domestic delds of labor. A desertion here, a with-
drawment of divine influence from these points, sends the surest,
deadliest blight over all the prospects of Zion. Who can doubt
that the numbers, and piety, and success of the ministry, must
be proportioned to the prayers which God hears for this end ?
If you would have the world converted to God, brethren, you
must pray much and fervently for the ministry, by whose labors
and self-denial the work is chiefly to be accomplished. You
must pray much and fervently also for those institutions, whose
great design is to furnish this efficient ministry for the world's
redemption.

I close, by giving the assurance that this theological seminary
shall be faithfijjly devoted to the great design, which we have
been considering — a faithful ministry for the world. The
course of instruction will be liberal, full and thorough. The
system of theology as here explained and defended will be the
Calvinistic, in the general form in which it appears in the works
of Edwards, Bellamy, Dwight, etc. New England theology
will be the standard of our orthodoxy — the system of faith
which we cordially believe has the Bible for its basis. But we
do not feel at liberty to call any man, master, in the sense of
authority over our faith. We shall examine the opinions of
the men we most favor, with as much fireedom as those who

1838.] JJhiiatii to Ckristianity. 803

dfShv the widest from us. We shall state, illustrate and defend
our opinions in our own way, and make our own devout ex-
amination of truth the measure of our instructions.

And while this will be the course of instruction, we will al-
low the same freedom to the youth under our care. We will
urge them to make their own enlightened and honest convic-
tions the guide of their faith and practice. While we avow the
principles of our faith and the grounds of our orthodoxy, we ab-
jure all sectarianism and will leave others to the fi-ee and honest
expression of their own sentiments. We pledge our health and
strength — our time and talents — our influence and example
to the undivided object for which this seminary is founded —
the training up an efficient ministry for the world. We expect
the confidence and support of the pious — we pray for the ap-
probation and blessing of heaven.

ARTICLE X.

On the Intre^uenct of the Allusions to Christianity

IN Greek and Roman Writers.

TruuUtad from the Latin of H. T. Ttehirner. By Horatio B. Haekett, ProloMor of Lao-

f oaf 09, Brown CJnivorsity.

That the Greek and Roman writers, who were contempo-
rary with the apostles, have left nothing on record either in re-
gard to the birth and actions of our Lord, or the early origin of
the christian church, can excite the surprise of no one. For
the Greeks and Romans were not accustomed to visit Jerusalem
in the manner, that they were in the habit of resorting, the
former to Rome, and the latter, to Athens. Very few, except
soldiers, magistrates and merchants travelled to Palestine, which
was situated on the remotest borders of the empire, and desti-
tute of all those objects, which would be likely to attract either
the votaries of science, or men of pleasure. As to the infor-
mation concerning Jesus Christ, which it is probable, that Pon-
tius Pilate, by whose authority the Saviour was put to death,
transmitted to Tiberius, the number of those, who received it,
was but smaU, and even they did not regard it as in any way

&04 AUusians to ChriitianUy. [Jabt*

remarkable, or worthy of very particular notice.* The Greeks
and Romans despised the Jews as a superstitious and illiterate
people, and for this reason they neither read their sacred books,
with whose very language in ract they were unacquainted, nor
felt any great curiosity in regard to what took place among them.
It is not strange, therefore, that the Greek and Roman writers,
who were contemporary with the apostles, were either ignorant
of the christian sect or silent concerning them.

But how is it to be explained, that even those authors, who
wrote in the reign of Domitian, Trajan, Hadrian and the Anto-
nines, so very seldom refer to the Christians, although spread,
as they then were, throughout all parts of th^ Roman world ?
Were the christian churches, during a whole century (for Domi-
tian obtained the sovereignty in the year 81 and Marcus Aure-
lius died in the year 180^ so buried in a comer, that they were
altogether unknown ? Might we not have expected, that the
eyes of mankind would have been turned towards those, who
were sometimes the objects of punishment by the magistrates
and who still oftener suffered irom the violence of the multi-
tude, who were enraged against them for despising their gods ?
Were those, who make no mention of the Christians, ignorant
of them ? or what reasons in short had they for their silence ?
It is not without cause surely, that such inquiries are made ;
and since they have recently been brought forward anew, and
have been pronounced worthy of a more critical investigation,
than they have yet received, by a man, to whose opinions we
are accustomed to listen with respect, we deem it proper to
give the subject a brief discussion, especially as it is not alto-
gether foreign to a department of study, in which we are par-
ticularly interested.!
■■ ■ ■ .■ ■ — ■ — '■ ■ 'I ■ . I. I ^1 .11 ..

* The writings, which are known at the present day under the
name of Acts of Pilate, are certainiy not genuine: nor can any one
easily believe, that Pilate wrote to the emperor those things, which
Tertullian pretends were written by him. But that Pilate made a
report to Tiberius in reference to the case of Jesus Christ, is very
credible : since it belonged to the procurators to do this on occasions
of the like nature. CA-. HenkU De Pontii Pilati Actis in causa Jesu
Christ! ad Imp. Tiberium niisdis Probabilia, in ejusd. Opusc. Acad,
p. 199 sqq.

f This man is the learned Eiehstaedt, who in bis essay on the
question, whether Lucian intended by his writings to advance the
christian cause, says, that he cherislies the hope that this subject may
yet be more fully investigated. Jena, 1822. p. 29.

1838.] AUusions to ChrUtumity. M&

The question, however, which we propose to answer, has
reference only to those Greek and Roman writers, who flour-
ished from the time of Domitian to the end of the age of the
Antonines. For from this time the Christians, having come
forth, as it were, from the shade into the public light, and the
view of men, found henceforth both advocates and not a few
opponents of their cause ; and in the third century the most
distinguished of the Neo-Platonists, who were almost alone in
their cultivation of philosophy and Greek letters, not only men-^
tioned them, but also assailed their opinions and principles. On
the contrary those, who wrote in the reigns of Domitian, Tra-
jan, Hadrian and the Antonines, alluded to the Christians but
seldom ; for the most part they take no notice of them what-
ever ; in a few instances they speak of them briefly, and, as it
were, incidentally ; and in still fewer cases, enter into argument
against them.*

Among the Greeks, Dio Chrysostom, Plutarch, Oenomaus,
who in the time of Hadrian anticipated the part of Lucian as a
derider of the gods Maximus Tyrius and Pausanias, are entirely
silent in respect to the Christians. In Plutarch, it is true, some
have imagined, that they found an allusion to them in that pas-
sage of the Symposion, where reference is made to certain phi-
losophers, who on account of their teaching, ovventtxwtaTOp
MM rot; fiiov TO iXntCeiv (that hope is the great supporter of
life) and, aXovatjg ikntdog ovif i^dwovaijg ovx aviurov sivai rey
fitoi^ (that life, unless there be hope to sweeten it is too wretch-
ed to be endured), were called iXntartuoi, But since there is
nothing in this place to lead us to suppose, that it is a hope of
heaven, such as the Christians cherished, which is here intend-

* It seems however by no means improbable, that they may have
been mentioned in some one or other of tboee works of antiquity,
which are no longer extant. Nor should we particularly object to
it, if any one is disposed to think that the hands of superstitious men
may have erased or omitted in the ancient manuscripts all those pas-
sages, which contained reproachful allusions to the Christians. That
this was sometimes done may be inferred with some appearance of
probability from the fact, that the dialogue of Lucian on the death
of PeregrinuB, in which the Christians are violently assailed, is want-
ing in a great many copies: and in one of the Royal manuscripts,
there occurs an omission with the remark : irtavd-a notqti&7i knortt
in$Q iaxt Ili^sygafcv ttltvifis XoyoVy dia to iv xov t^ inoaxemnit dg %w
X^tauoPiafiW. See the note in Opp. Luciani ed. ReUz, tom.1 11. p. 925.

206 AUtuiom to Christianiiy^ [Jak.

ed, and since the Christians, who lived in the time of Plutarch,
neither called themselves philosophers, nor were so called by
others, it is utterly incredible, that this term, Elpisticsy should
contain a tacit allusion to diem.* Thus Plutarch, like the au-
thor just mentioned, says nothing in relation to the Christians.
This silence now appears the more singular, because he was a
man, who took an interest in all which is human, who watched
with the most careful eye the religious aspects of his time, who
inculcated many principles very similar to those of the Christians,
and without doubt had some acquaintance with the state and
history of the Jews.f Next to Plutarch, we should naturally
refer to Oenomaus as the author most likely to have left some
testimony in regard to the christian church. He lived in the
time of Hadrian and wrote a treatise on the falsehood of oracles
under the title of: q-foga yotjtofw (detection of impostors). Had
he intended this now as au attack upon superstition, it would
have been very pertinent to his object to have commended the
Christians for their contempt of oracles and their abhorrence of
the arts of deception ; but if, on the contrary, his design was to
subvert religion itself, by holding up the gods to ridk;ule, it
would then seem to have fallen very naturally in his way, to
deride and censure those, who were introducing new rites of
worship. Oenomaus however did not record so much as a
word in regard to the Christians. We gather this, not only
from the remains, scanty, it is true, of the book just mentioned,
but from the fact, that Eusebius neither commends him as the
eulogist, nor censures him as the accuser of the Christians.^

We turn to the Roman writers and we find nearly all of them
observing tlie same silence on the subject, which is observed
by the Greeks* Liucan indeed, Silius ItaVicus, Quinctilian,
Martial, Florus, and Curtius Rufus, as they were eitlier poets,

* This passage of Plutarch is found L.IV. Qiiaeat IV. c.a p. 503.
torn. III. ed. fVyUenbach, Heumann in Actis phiios. Vol. III. p. 911
seq., has it, Christian Elpistics : Brucker, in Hist. Crit Philoa. torn.
HI. p. 244, influenced by satisfactory reaaons, denies the correctness
of this. Programma Leuschneri super.

f Which is ascertained e Convivalium Disputationem Liber IV.
Quaest V. p. 507, and Quaest. VI. p. 512.

I The fragments of Oenomaus, in regard to whom there is some
account in litbricii Bibl. Graec. Vol. III. p. 522 seq. ed. Harles, are
found in Eusebius, in his Praeparatio Evangelica L. V. e. 18 at the
close, and L. VI. o. 6—7.

1888.] JJhuwm to Chrutiamijf. Wl

or teachers of rhetoric, or historians of events prior to their own
time, bad no very natural occasion for speaking of the christian
sect. But that there should not occur even the shghtest allu-
sion to them in Juvenal also, who was occupied entirely in de-
scribing the mannei's of his age, nor again in Gellius, and Apu-
leius, may appear less easy of explanation. Juvenal in partic-
ular had very frequent opportunities to notice them : as, for ex-
ample, in tliat passage, iu which referring to those, who for-
sook the religion of their country, he says :

''The laws of Rome those blinded bigots slight

In superstitious dread of Jewish rite.

To Moses and his mystic vohime true/' etc.*

Was it not here directly in bis way to censure also the Christians,
who by their observance of foreign rites, showed equal contempt
of the Romaas ? Aulus Gellius in his Noctes Atticae has
brought togetlier from every quarter whatever seemed to him
worthy of notice ; but he has passed over entirely all account
of the christian religion ; and in like manner Luceius Apuleius
has neither mentioned the Christians in his Metamorphoses,
where be speaks of the sacred rites and mysteries of his time ;
nor in his dissertations on the deity of Socrates and the world,
in which the opinkxis of the Platonists are reviewed, has be di-
rected any of his remarics against them.

Thus nearly all tbe writers of this period are silent. Some
of them indeed mentkxi the Christians, but it is for the most
part in very few words, so that it has the appearance of acci-
dent, rather tlian of d^gn. No one speaks of them at all be-
fore tbe age of Trajan : buttof tliose, who wrote in tbe reign of
this emperor, Tacitus, Suetonius and Pliny Secundus, the
Younger, bave made mention of them. Tacitus, in giving an
account of the conflagratk)n of the city, which was supposed to
have been set on fire by order of Nero, relates, that the empe-
ror for the pui-pose of averting suspicion from himself, charged
the crime upon the Christians, and inflicted on them punishments
of the mo6t studied cruelty ; and in this connection he explains
the origin of the name wluch they bore, and characterizes their
religion as a pernicious superstition and their spirit as that of
hatred towards the human race.f. Suetonius m his life of Ne-

• Satyra XIV. v. 100 sqq.

t This well known passage is found Annal. L. XV. e. 44»

806 AUuriom to ChriitiaaUy. [Jait^

ro* alludes to the same punishments and speaks of the Chrisdans
as a class of men addicted to a new and mischievous superstition :
and the same writer in his life of Claudius states, that the Jews
were expelled from Rome by this emperor, because they were
perpetudly engaging in disturbances, to which they were instiga-
ted by a certain Chrestus.f This Chrestus some have been dis*
posed to regard not as Christus or Christ, but as a man of Greek
extraction, whose history is unknown, save that he was a pros-
elyte to the Jewish faith and excited seditions at Rome. The
ground of this opinion is, that Suetonius, had he been ever so
ignorant of the christian cause, could not have asserted in re-
gard to Christ, that he was personally at Rome and excited se-
ditions there in the reign of Claudius.^ But the fact is, that the
objection, which the learned men who entertain this view, allege,
is not authorised by the passage, from which they pretend to
derive it. Suetonius relates, that Claudius banished the Jews
from Rome, because they were odious to him on account of
their constant disturbances, and he supposed that the author of
these disturbances was Chrestus, since he had heard that he,
although executed as a criminal, had found many foUowers,
who admitted his claims as king of the Jews, and who still sur-
vived him. But that the Jews stirred up commotions at Rome,
and that Christ was at Rome in the time of Claudius and ex-
cited disturbances there, he does not afBrm. Hence there b
nothing to forbid the supposition, that Suetonius intended to re-
fer to Christ, who by the mere change of a single letter was,
as Lactantius testifies, frequently called Chrestus dso by others.^
Nor is there any real force in the suggestion of Erasmus, that
the idea of instigaUng can be understood only of a person, who
is actually present. For when it is said, that the Jews were
perpetwdly raising disturbances, it cannot be meant that they
were instigated by the personal agency of the same author.
Suetonius, therefore, has mentioned the Christians twice, but

• c 16. t c. 25.

X This was the opinion of HUscher in his essay on the Chrestua,
of whom Suetonius makes mention. But we have not been able to
examine either tiiis or the essays of Heumann and Wirth on the
Chrestus of Suetonius.

§ Institt. div. L. IV. c. 7. The latest editor of Suetonius, Baum-
gwrten-Cruduij Vol. IL p. 55^ although 'not decided in his opinion,
atiU fovors our view.

1888.] AOmom to C^rutianity. 209

hi fewer words than Tacittis and in so cursory a way, that he
seems to have been hardly aware of their existence.

In the well known letter of Pliny Secundus, which he wrote
to the emperor Trajan, when he was propraetor of Bithynia,
about the year 104, we have not only more ample, but more
certain also, and more important information in regard to the
Christians. From this letter we learn, that they were now dis-
persed in all directions throughout Bithynia, so that many of
the temples were abandoned, and the customary rites of religion
neglected. For this reason they were accused before the pro-
praetor, who considered it his duty to institute an inquiry in re-
gard to these despisers of the public religion, and to adopt mea-
sures of severity against them. The course, which was pursued,
he explains to the emperor very minutely, and acquaints him
also with such further particulars, as he had ascertained in re-
gard to the sect ; such as, that on a stated day they were ao
customed to assemble before lights and sing an hymn to Christy
as Oody and to bind themselves with an oathy that they would
not be guilty of any crime, but would abstain from theft, rob^
bery, acmteryy violation of promises, and withholding of proper^
ty committed to their care : and he adds, that the contagion of
this superstition (for so be denominates the christian faith) had
spread, before he had any thought of interfering to check it,
not only through the cities, but the villages also and the coun-
try in general. Such facts, as it became him in his capacity of
propraetor to lay before the emperor, he examined with proper
care. But their opinions on religious subjects he had not accu-
rately investigated ; nor bad he read their sacred books ; and
that, which he wrote concerning them, was written, not for the
purpose of being preserved as a historical record, but merely
that the emperor might know, what had been done in the case,
and might be enabled to judge in regard to the expediency and
nature of any further action.*

* Every one knows, that this letter is the ninety-sixth of the tenth
book of the letters of Pliny ; in the last edition of which, Gierigius,
Tom. IT. p. 498 tqq, has very ably discussed the question of its genuine-
ness, and maintains it successftilty against Semler. Haversaat (Ver-
(heidigung der PUniseKen Briefe iiber die Christen gegen die Einwen-
dungen des Hm. D, Sender, Gdttingen, 1783) took the same ground
before him. This letter, which is found in all the manuscripts, which
corresponds exactly to the characters of Pliny and Trajan, which
agrees with those circumstances, which we learn from other sources

Vol. XI. No. 29. 27

210 AUuiiom to Ckri$iianiiif. [Jar.

The same infrequency of allusion to the ChristiaiiSy which
marked the time of Trajan, marked also that of Hadrian. For
besides Hadrian himself, who deserves certainly to be ranked
among Roman authors (an enthusiastic lover of poetry and let-
ters in general he b calied by Spartianus),''^ Arrian b the only
writer, who has referred to them. All the productions of Hadrian
mdeed have perished, except one letter written to Servianus^
which Vopiscus transcribed from the works of Phlegon, a freed
man of Hadrian and inserted in the life of Satuminus^f In this
letter the emperor inveighs against the manners of the Egyp-
tians, i. e. of the Alexandrians, pronouncing them a most sedi-
tious, false and violent class of men ; and on this occasion he
speaks of the Christians in language as follows : " Those, who
worship Serapis, are Christians ; and these are those devoted to
tbe service of Serapis, who call themselves the bishops of Christ.
There is no ruler of the Jewish synagogue there, no Samaritan^
no presbyter of the Christians, who is not an astrologer, a sooth-
sayer, a diviner. The patriarch himself, when he comes to
Egypt, is compelled by some to worship Serapis, by othecs,
Christ." At Alexandria, whither men of every descriptkni
were accustomed to find their way, he had gathered some vague
knowledge in regard to the Christians, as well as the observers
of other religious rites. The names of presbyters and bishops
had thus come to his ears. But as he had vastly more curiosi-
ty than love of truth, and was precipitate in his conclusions, he
neglected to examine the accurtey of what he heard and thus
confounded the Christians with the worshippers of Serapis, who
were the sect, to which most of the Alexandrians belonged.
Hence too it was, that he imputed to tbe Christians the same
arts of divination, which the adherents of other new and foreign
sects were accustomed to practise, which although accounted
odious indeed, and frequentiy punished in the case of the astro-
logers, were still eagerly sought even by the emperors them-

in regard to tbe Christiansy which has every internal evidence in its
favor, and is mentioned by Tertullian, Eusebiua and Jerome ; this
letter, I say, together with the reply of Trajan must surely be consid-
ered as genuine, unless you are willing to pronounce all the records
of antiquity spurious, and to deny the credibility of history in every
case whatever.

* Id vita Hadriani, c. 13. pu 13. Scriptorum historiae Augostae^
ed. Lips.

f c. 8. p. 435 of the book named.

1838.] Attusians to airiiiumity. 21 1

selves. It is thus, it would seem, that we are to account for it,
that he should ma^e the altogether false and absurd remarks
respecting the Christians, which have been quoted above. No-
thing therefore, which Hadrian has left, throws light upon the
early history of the church. Nor are we indebted for any thing
of this nature to Arrian, who flouri3hed in his reign. All, that
we can infer from the passage, in which he refers to the Gali-
laeans for the sake of illustration, is that the Christians were
considered by Arrian or Epictetus (if these are the words of the
master rather than of the disciple), as men, who from the influ-
ence of phrenzy and habit {vno fiavmg xui vno e&ovg) could
show the same contempt of pain and death, with which reason
taught the philosopher to regard them.^

The^e, so iar as we know, are all the instances, in which there
occur any reference to the Christians in Greek and Latin wri-
ters until the age of the Antonines.

At length in the age of the Antonines, the Christians found
able and eloquent advocates of their cause, began to emerge
fix>m their obscurity, and to attract the notice of mankind.
Still the eyes of all were not turned towards them even then ;
many, if they were not ignorant of them, at least overlooked
them, and no one foresaw in the rise of the Christians the speedy
downfell of the whole system of the public religion, in this
age, however, especially towards its close, a more general atten-
tion was fixed upon them, than had been at any time before ; so
that some noticed them in brief, yet explicit terms ; while others
attacked them at greater length, and employed argument against
them.

They are mentioned and censured by Galen, a very celebra-
ted physician of that period, and by Marcus Antoninus. Gralen
refers to them in two places. In one he is speaking of certain
physicians and philosophers, who adhere with such obstinacy
to their own views, that he, who disputes with them, does noth-
ing but trifle. Having compared them to crooked pieces of

* This pasBBge is contained in Epicteti Dissertatiooum L. IV. c. 7.
p. 618. Tom, 1. ed. Schweig, — But in regard to another passage oc-
carriog, L. II. c 3. p. 214 sq., we dare not pronounce on the ques-
tion, whether it refers to the Jews or Christians. The Jews indeed,
here mentioned, are called fiamunatj which seems to indicate, that
Christians are meant. But Jews might be so termed, either on ac«
count of their frequent ablutions, or the baptism, to which proselytea.
were accustomed to submit on their adoption of the Jewish &itb.

412 AUusians to Chrisiiamty. [Jan.

wood, which can never be straightened^ and to withered trees,
which, although they are transferred to a new soil, are still un-
fruitful, he adds, that it is easier to persuade the followers of
Moses or Christ to change their sentiments, than it is such phy-
sicians and philosophers. ^ He charges the Christians therefore
with an obstinate and unyielding disposition, which made it im-
possible to reason with them with any hope of success. In
the other place he is opposing a certain Archigenes who had
maintained, that there are eight variations of the pulse, and says,
that he ought to support his views, if not by actual demonstra-
tion, yet by appropriate argument, unless a person, as if he be-
longed to the school of Moses or Christ, (jag eig Movaov »a^
X()iatov dttttgiptjv aqftyfievos) is willing to take assertions for
proof (vofiovg avanodHxtovg),j He censures therefore equally
Christians and Jews as men, who give a blind assent to dogmas,
which have never been proved and which are sustained by no
evidence.

In a similar manner the Christians are mentioned by Marcus
Antoninus, in his Meditations. In that celebrated passage in
which their name occurs, the imperial philosopher inquires,
what it is, which should produce that state of the soul, as it is
about to leave the body, by which, whether it survive the
change, or perish, it may be rendered prompt and ready for the
issue, which awaits it, and he answers the question by saying that
this readiness, to izoifiov tovto, ought to spring from a proper con-
viction of the mind itself, dno idixijg ngtoicjg, such as is charac-
teristic of the truly wise man, fttj xaxu tpiktjv xagaTuCtPf ^Sg ov
XQiOTiavoi, not from mere obstinacy, such as is accustomed to
produce its effect in the case of the Christians. And the same
author adds further, that it becomes man to depart from life
kekoyiOfiivoDgy with consideration, xa« acfivag, with dignity,
icac taaxi xa$ dkkov neiaat, in such a way as to recommend by
his example to others also the like firmness of mind, but arpa^oi*
itog^ not in the manner of actors, declaiming on the stage ; which
last words appear to refer to the Christians, who, as they were
led to punbhment, frequently either boasted of their hope and

* This passage is found in bin book de Pulsuum DifTerentits, L.
III. c. 3. Tom. Vlil. p. 68. ed. Cbart. Tom. VIII. p. 651. ed. Lipw-
ensis, recently illustrated by KiAehnius^ my colleague, a most accom-
plished master of Grecian literature.

1 1. 1. L. II. c. 4. Tom, VIII. p. 43. ed. Chart. Tom. VIII. p.
579. ed. Lipe.

1838,] AJbaiom to CkrutUmUy. 313

joy, or suQg an hymn to Christ, or exhorted their brethren to
constancy and contempt of death. Marcus Antoninus therefore
considered the Christians, many of whom were persecuted in
his own reign, as men, who in despising death, which some of
them in their eagerness for martyrdom are said to have even
sought, exhibited, not wisdom, but stubbornness and obstinacy,
and who departed firom life, as if from a stage, like actors re-
hearsing their parts. ^

This is the only place, in which Marcus Antoninus has spoken
of the Christians ; nor can we adduce any thing further, which
gives us more accurate information in regard to his opinions con-
cerning them. For those two letters, which are attributed to him,
one of which he is said to have addressed to the Roman senate,
the other to the Common of Asia {to uo$pop '^amg, sc. oi/ye^
d(^iov)y i. e. to the common council of the Asiatic cities, we regard
as spurious, and think, that they were forged by some Christians
with the design of recommending to the emperor of their times
a lenient policy towards themselves, from the example of those
previous emperors, whom posterity most applauded. In regard
to the former of these letters, in which Marcus communicates to
the Roman Senate mtelligence respecting a signal victory, which
he had obtained over the Marcomanni near the river Granua,
and which he ascribes to the prayers of the thundering legion,
no defence can be attempted for a moment.f in support of the
genuineness of the other, some things were formerly said and
have of late been repeated, which are not altogether without
plausibility. But still there are many difficulties, which forbid
assent. For not to insist on the manifest inconsistency between
the office of the emperor, who as Fontifex Maximus presided
over the public institutions of religion and the remark at the
commencement of the letter, that it belongs to the gods them-
selves to punish the despisers of their divinity, not to men, it is

* This place is found in the Coromentaries of Marcus AntoniDus,
L. XI. c. 3. The word nagaxa^siag is derived from military opera-
tioDR, where line is opposed to line, soldier to soldier. If this be done
nsbly, it is mere obstinacy and stubbomness^ In like manner the
word nmQtnwra$a&ai is used L. VIII. c. 48.

t By KtHntr in the work, Die ^gape oder der geheimne WeUhund dtr
Chritieny p. 3d9, sqq., against whom Eichstaedt in quarta Exercita-
tionum Antoniniarum. Also separately published, and recently in-
aerted in Vol. I. Annalium aeademiae TieoaDsia, has urged auob ar-
gumentsy that we feel fully eooiSrroed in our opinion.

214 Allusions to Christianity. [J ah.

surely a circumstaDce, which must strike ereiy critic as suspi*
cious, that his epistle is mentioned neither by Athenagoras, who
addressed his ngsapaa to the same emperor, and omitted noth-
ing, which could redound to his credit, or would be likely to
conciliate his favor towards the Christians, nor by Melito even
in that passage of his Apology presented to the same emperor
in which he refers to the edict issued by Hadrian and Antoninus
Pius in favor of the christian party. ^ It is not therefore with-
out sufficient grounds for the rejection, that we have set aside
the letters ascribed to Marcus Antoninus and have cited as the
only pertinent passage in his works the one, which ocoirs in the
Commentaries, of which the emperor himself is at once the au-
thor and the subject ; in which the Christians indeed are men-
tioned, but in such a manner, that he seems to have done it
from accident, rather than from design.

But with the exception of Galen and Marcus Antoninus him-
self, all those, who lived in the age of the Antonines, and made
mention of the Christians at all, noticed them, not in a few
words, but with particularity, and entered bto controversy with
them. For this reason they have been called, and wiUi pro-
priety too, the first opponents of the Christians ; among whom
we should mention Crescens, a Cynic, Fronto a very celebrated
rhetorician and one of the teachers of Marcus Antoninus, Lu-
cian of Samosata, and finally Celsus, a philosopher either of the
Epicurean or Platonic school.

Crescens, who leads the way in the train of these writers,
lived at Rome in the reign of Antoninus Pius, and there de-
nounced the Christians in a public manner. He disputed with
Justin, the Martyr so called, and in revenge for the censure,
which the latter applied to the philosophers, carried his hostility
to him so far, as to plot against his life. These facts are made
known to us by Justin and his disciple Tatian, to whom Euse-
bius is indebted for all his statements, which relate to Cres-
cens.f Justin does not indeed state in express terms, that he
wrote against the Christians ; nor can we infer this from his
saying, that he, driiAOOMf xai ngog x^9^^ ^^* v^ovfjp to»v noXXatv,
publicly and for the purpose of gratifying the multitude and ob*

* Euaehius has preserved a fragment of the Apology of Melito in
Historia Ecclea. L. IV. c 26.

f See JtMfiiit Apologia II. c. 3. p. 90 sq., Tatiani oratio adversiis
Graecoe, c. a p. 960. ed.Bensdid^ et EusMi hist Eccles. L. IV. e. 16.

1838.] AOHtiani to OiristianUy. 215

taining their applause, censured the Christians as i^iovg hm
uoipt^. For aU which this language implies may have been
done in the form of conireisations, either b a school, or in some
other of the customary resorts for discussion. But when Jus-
tin speaks in the same place of questions proposed by himself,
and replies given to them by (Jrescens, and says, that he is
ignorant, whether they were carried to the emperors or not, we
are led to conclude, that Crescens had, not only oral, but also
written controversy with the Christians. That however he
was an ordinary and obscure man, and that hb works were but
little read, is shown with much certainty by the entire absence
of all allusicHi to him in Greek and Roman writers, and by the
very rare occurrence of it in christian writers.

Crescens is followed by Fronto Cirtensis, a very eminent
rhetorician of the age of the Antonines, and the author of some
highly celebrated orations and letters, the remains of which
Angelus Maius has recently discovered and given to the public.
Antoninus Pius appointed him teacher of Roman eloquence to
the young princes, Marcus Aurelius, and Lucius Verus, and
honored him with the office of consul. In his being chosen to
places of such trust and distinction, we have sufficient proof of
the high estimation, in which he was held. In respect now to
this man so conspicuous for his scholarship and rank, Minucius
Felix, his contemporary, has stated in his Octavius, (in which
work the cause of the Chrbtians is ably defended), that he
wrote against the Christians, and accused them of holding as-
semblies, in which they were guilty of incest. Minucius com-
municates nothing further in regard to him ; for that the argu^
ments, which are urged against the Christians by Caecilius,,
who in the Octavius personates the part of a defender of the
received religion, were in fact those of Fronto, is a mere con-
jecture, which some have approved, because Minucius Felix
appears to have imitated the eloquence of Fronto. Nothbg
has been transmitted either by Minucius Felix or any other
writer, which explains either on what occasion Fronto wrote
against the Christians, or what obiect he proposed to secure by
his attack upon them. But we adopt perhaps an opinion, which
probability supports, if not history, when we assume that the
rhetorician, as he belonged to the court of Marcus Aurelius, in
whose reign many of the Christians were accused of muider
and the most miamous licentiousness, wrote against them, for
the purpose of justifying the emperor in the severity of his

916 Albm&nt to ChriitUmiijf. [Jah.

edictB against them. With such a design, he would naturally
be interested to show, that they were guilty of the charges for
which they su^red. This, it would seem, is the view, which
many have taken. The particulars, which we learn in regard
to Fronto, are indeed few, yet important to be known, because
we discover from them, that there had arisen enemies of the
Christians even thus early in the very palace of the emperor,
and that their apologists had ample cause for vindicating them
against the crimes, which were imputed to them.^

We come next to Lucian. Upon him we shall have occa-
sion to dwell longer, than was necessary in the case of Fronto.
This writer mentions the Christians expressly in two places ;
for the Philopatris, in which there are many things said against
them, is not from the hand of Lucian of Samosata, but was pro-
duced so late, as in the time of Julian.f One c^ these passages
is found in the book, entitled, Alexander or Pseudomantis,
where it is stated that this Alexander, the founder of certain
new religious rites, and a crafty impostor, had been accustomed,
in imitation of the caution, which the guardians of the Eleu-
sinian mysteries observed in this matter, to exclude equally
Christians and Epicureans from a knowledge of his secrets.^
The other passage, fix>m which Lucian's opinion relative to the
Christians is known, occurs in his book on the death of Fere-
grinus, the famous Cynic, who, if Lucian relates the truth,
ended a life of the basest depravity and crime by burning him-
self about the year 166, in the presence of a vast concourse of
people, at Olympia. Lucian here mentions among other things
in regard to this Peregrinus, who wished to be called Proteus,
that he had learned vtjv ^ttv/iaaTijp ao(p$€tp tm¥ XQiotMpmv;
and that having attained among them the rank of prophet and
hierarch he was worshipped by them as a god ; and on this
account he stigmatizes them as men, who were credulous and
who could be easily deceived by any impostor. The same

* The places in Mirmcitu Felix, which relate to Pronto, occur in
hia Octavius c. 9 and c. 31. In regard to the life and writings of
Fronto, Angdus Mahu has treated in a learned manner in M. Cor-
nelii Frontonis Opp. ed. P. L p. 1 sqq.

f This has been satisfactorily shown by Qutntr in his diBsertadon
concerning the age and author of the dialogue, entitled Philopatris,
and bearing the name of Lucian ; and which is inserted Opp. Luc.
Tom< IL ed. Rax. p. 706.

X c 38. p. d44. Tom. II. ed. JSetr.

1888.] jfOutiMi to OiriHumity. S17

writer nk>reover has much to say in reference to the zeal of the
Christians in behalf of Peregrij^us, while he lay in prison and
chains, on the charge of being a Christian. He represents
them as assembling from every quarter, and attempting by every
method to efiect his release, as encouraging and consoling him
in his captivity and showing to him as much regauti and vene-
ration, as if he bad been a second Socrates. His design in
these statements, if we mistake not, was, to make it appear
that they were men of a fectious spirit and withheld by no
scruples from any crime, which would promote their cause.
He still iurther styles the Christians wretches, who in die hope
that they should prove immortal in soul and body, regard death
with a stupid contempt, and suffer themselves to be persuaded,
that they are brethren, because having abandoned the gods of
the Greeks they worship the crucified sophist, and live accord-
ing to his precepts ; and ' believe these and other absurdities
without evidence ; so that it is not strange, that any impostor,
who understands at all the arts of management, can easily rise
to wealth among them and impose on their simplicity to any
extent.^ Thus Lucian censured the Christians as ignorant^
credulous and superstitious men. But he never controverted
their opinions or argued agaix^ their apologists, either because
he had no knowledge of them, or, which we think nearer the
truth, because he wbhed to appear to hold in contempt those,
who by their observance of new rites of reFigion were the ob^
jects of his scorn. For we deem it scarcely credible, that Lu-
cian, unequaUed, as he was, by any man of his age, in hb know-
ledge of public and private affairs, and in his intimate acquaint-
ance both by travel and correspondence with persons of every
rank and place, should have been altogether ignorant of the
writings of Justin Martyr, Athenagoras, and even of Tatian, his
own countryman ; (for Tatian was by birth a Syrian).

But while in these places Lucian has reviled the Christians
in express terms, he appears to iiave aimed at them indirect
censure everywhere in his books on the true art of history.
We think, however, that he has actually done this only in a
few cases : for having changed our opinion, we do not at pres-
ent assent to those views, which Krebs has maintained on this

subject, although Eichstaedt has recently sanctioned them by

.. -I ■■ I- i.ii ■■ I .... II .11 I ..1 1 1 .1 II III (■ I II I I ■■ ■ I ■ ■■

* The reader will find these remarks in the lx>ok referred to, on
the death of Peregrinus, c 11—13. p. 233—338. torn. III.

Vol. XL No. 29. 28

818 ABunoTu to Chrkttanity. [Jah.

bis approbation.* All those remarks, which are supposed to
refer either to the prophet Jonah living three days in the whale's
belly, or to Christ walking upon the sea, or to the contest of the
archangel Michael with Satan, described in the Apocalypse,
are so introduced, that they may have been writtea either for
the purpose of jest, or of ridiculing the Greeks for their credulity
and superstition, even by a man, who had not the least knowl-
edge of the Christians. The story of the mariners, which Lo-
cian is so minute in relating, who having sailed a thousand and
five hundred stadia, come to certain islands and cities, situated
in the belly of a huge animal, where they find herbs and crea«
tures of every sort, and whence after the expiration of a year
and six months they emerge and again traverse the deep, is
entirely dissimilar to the account, which the sacred Scriptures
give concerning the prophet Jonah.f In like manner hb nana-
tive in regard to the battle of Endymion and the Selenitae, m-
habitants of the moon, with Phaethon and Helios, inhabitants
of the sun, is understood surely, with great latitude of construe*
tion, in being supposed to refer to the battle of Michael and
Satan. For had Lucian designed to allude to thiis battle, re-
lated in the twelfth chapter of the Apocalypse, he should have
wrought into his description such circumstances, as would be
pertinent to that character of an accuser, which Satan bears,
and also to that blood of the Lamb, by which he is overcome.
Besides the battle of Endymion and rhaethon terminates in a
peace favorable to both : whereas that of Michael and Satan
ends in the victory of Michael who hurls his adversary firom the
heavens.! These therefore and other passages are thought to
have but a forced application to the records of sacred history.
At the same time there are some things in the writings of Lu-

* See Krebt in regard to the malioiqus designs of Luoian to nipike
(he Christian religion appear weak and ridiculous, in Diss, in ejus d.
opusc. acad. et scholast. p. 308 sqq. A\bo Eichstaedt in Diss, publish-
ed at Jena 1820, on the question, whether Lucian wished hy what he
wrote to aid the Christian cause. In our work, with the title of Hlt-
torrae Apologetices Lips. 1805, we adopted the opinion of Krebs,
But at preseht we are inclined to a different view in respect to very
many of the passages adduced by this learned man.

f The story of the ship entering the mouth of a whale is given JD
his work de vera Historia L. I. c. 30—40. p. 94 — 101.

X The account of the battle between Endymion and Phaethon may
be read 1. 1, c. 10—21. p. 77—87.

1896.] JUuiUHu to (Jkriitimit}/. 219

cwo, which evea in oar view admit of this reference. We con-
sider it necessary to understand thus what he says concerning a
city^ situated upon the islands of the blessed, which is all gold
and surrounded with walls of emerald.* Since the idea of such
a city upon these blands never occurs in any of the Greek
writei3, it would seem not improbable that Lucian had his
thoughts on the heavenly Jerusalem, of whose descent upon the
earth the Chiliasts were in constant expectation, and which the
author of the Apocalypse represents as effulgent with the
splendor of the most costly gems. In like manner we should
refer to the same origin, we think, what he says in regard to
fountains full of honey and rivers of milk, as well as what be
observes respecting reregrinus, that by his death he left Ins
foUowers orpnansf— in which case he seems to have designed
to express himself in imitation of our Lord in John, 14: 18>

But ail these instances, as Eichstaedt has justly remarked,
are rather conjectural than certain. The views of learned men
will always differ in regard to the interpretation <^ passages of
this nature. After what has been adduced, however, from his
book on the death of Peregrinus, there can be no doubt, that
Ludan entertained opinions, which did great injustice to the .
Chrisuans ; and no one, we are sure, can read the evidence of
this and still allow himself to think, that he favored them and
wbhed to aid their cause.:^ The idea is entirely unsupported ;
It is almost absurd. Lucian ridiculed indeed the gods of the
Greeks, and denounced the rites of their religion ; but be did
this, that he ought expose to contempt that, which both in his
view and in fact deserved such exposure ; and not by imy means
that he might prepare the way for the triumpt) of the Christians,
to whom he rendered, if any, an unintentional assistance. He
could scoff at one form of religion as readily as another ; and
in truth he made it as much hb aim to efiace from the minds of
men every vestige of piety, as to put an end to the reign of su-
perstition.

* L I. L. II. c. II. p. IlL

t De morte Peregrin c. 6. p. 330.

t In the dinertation of Eichtiatdi against Kethur in regard to the
intentions of Locian, to which we have already referred, there are
■DOM IngeniooB remarks on the topic in question, which deserve to
be read.

990 Allusions to GirisHamiy* [Jan.

If Lucian considered h sufficient to censure and revile the
Christians, Celsus, his contemportiry, (for it is highly probable,
that the Celsus, refuted by Origen, is the individual, to whom
Lucian dedicated his Pseudomantis), ^ felt it expedient to take
other ground. He lived towards the end of the age of the An-
tonines, and came forward against the supporters of Christianity,
as an assailant of their opinions, as a defender of the public re-
ligion against the ruin, with which he saw that they were
threatening it, and as the author of charges, which represented
them as factious, insurrectionary and dangerous to the State.
His work, entitled, Xoyog q)^kaX1J&fig, is extant but in part.
From the remains of it, however, not inconsiderable, which
Origen has preserved with the very words of the author in his
eight books, which he wrote in reply to Celsus, it is evident,
that he was no stranger to the circumstances of the Christians,
that he employed in his attacks upon them both raillery
and argument, and in short that he spared nothing, which would
serve either to invalidate their opinions, or expose them to
hatred. In this book Celsus anticipated the part of the Neo-
Platonista, who in subsequent times were distinguished for their
support of the public religion, and their opposition to the Chris-
tians ; although he himself, in our opinion, was not a Flatonist,
but an Epicurean, and was led to assume the position, which he
took, not from any impulse of piety, but rather from a regard to
the consistency of his own character. Havmg displayed so
much zeal against new and foreign rites (for the chief ground
on which he rested his censure of the Christians, was that they
embraced pagfiagov doyfia and vOfiO'&iaiav Kaivrfp), he felt that
it became him to give his support to that, which had the sanc-
tion of custom and the authority of law.

Celsus completes the list of those writers, who took notice of
the Christians from the time of Domitian to the conclusion of
the age of the Antonines. We have now before us the facts,
which the case involves. It remains that we explain why it is,
that the early history of the church received so little attention
from Greek and Roman authors.

* The ground of this assumption is this ; Ludan in the piece, which
is entitled Pseudomaotis, c 21. p. 229. Tom. II., mentions some books
on magic written by the Celsus, to whom this same piece is dedicated
and Origtn contra Cels. L. 1. p. 53. ed. Spenc. says, that it is very
probable, that the Celsus, refuted by himself, is the same person, to
whom the books on magic are attributed.

1888.] AUiuiam to Chrittianiiy. 821

The references, which these authors make to this subject,
until A. D. 180, the end of the age of the Antonines, are truly
inconsiderable, whether we have respect to their number or
their importance. For most of them, as the result of the fore-
going examination shows, were entirely silent in regard to the
Christians, some of them mentioned them briefly and censured
them in few words, (even Lucian was&r from speaking of them
with any thing like minuteness), and at length in the age of the
Antonines, Crescens, Fronto and Celsus took up the pen against
them. The question therefore is very properly asked, why the
Greek and Roman writers alluded to the Christians thus rarely ?
and it is a question surely, which deserves to be carefiiUy in*
vestigated.

In the prosecution of this inquiry, it is important to distinguish
properly the different periods, which the limits of our survey em-
brace. In the age of the Antonines, the Christians had obtained
notoriety ; but in the reigns of Domitian, Trajan, and Hadrian, we
suppose, that they were so situated, as to be altogether unknown
to multitudes, or known to them only by name. Even down
to the time of Trajan they were considered as a mere sect or
fiunily of the Jews, and were then, for the most part, safe, as
TertuUian says, * under the shadow of the toleration, which was
extended to the Jewish religion. Nor is there any thing singu-
lar in this, since at this period most of the Christians were con-
verts from the Jews, and their churches, whether we consider
the form of their government or the mode of their worship,
diSdred but little from the synagogues. Like the Jews, the
Christians were accustomed to meet on the Sabbath to offer
prayers, read the Scriptures and sing praises ; as the Jews had
their chief rulers of the synagogue and then: elders, so the Chris-
tians had their presbyters and bishops, who presided over their
afiairs ;. and the latter, as well as the former, abhorred the gods
of the heathen, refused to accept public offices and to perform
military service, and shunned theatres, shows and feasts* Not
a few Syrians indeed, bom at Antioch, Egyptians bom at Al-
exandria, Greeks, natives of Corinth and Athens, Romans, re^-
dents at Rome, espoused the Christian cause, and at length by
degrees oi iit tti^ an^ofivatiag were so increased, that in many
places they either equalled or exceeded the number rcoy in ttjQ
ncpltOfAfjg. But the Christians, notwithstanding this accession,

* In Apologetico c. 21. p. 53. ed. Semkri,

32S AUusiont to CkriitianiUy^ [Jan 4

were still regarded as a part of tbe Jewish commuiiity. For
it was but the recurrence of what often took place, that those
who were by birth either Egyptians or Grecians or Romans,
became proselytes to Judabm and lived in the observance of its
rites. Nor did it make any difference, that the Jews and Chris-
tians were at variance with each other. Those who ascertained
any thing in regard to these dissensions, were very naturally led
to confound them with the domestic feuds and animosities of
the various parties, into which the Jews were divided. This
was the opinion of those Roman magistrates, who replied to
the Jews, when they charged the apostle Paul with breaking
the law, that these were Cvttjfiata ntg^ Xoyov, km ovogAnttwf hm
pofiov, or Ctjtiifittva mg^ ttjg Uwg duaidatfioviag, *

Besides, there were not many among the Christians of that
time, either conspicuous for rank and birth, or embent for lite-
rary fiune, towards whom the eyes of all would be attracted.
Those certainly err, who suppose, that they were gathered fixKD
the very lowest dregs of the people. The authority of Caecil-
ius, who in the Octavius of Mbucius Felix acts the part of an
accuser of tbe Christians, and who reproaches them with pre-
cisely such an origm, has an undue mnuence, when made the
basis of such an opinion. It cannot be doubted, that fiom the
very first not a few persons of no mean consideration, in regard
both to property and mental culture, enrolled themselves on the
side of Chnst. For what could Paul and Peter have meant by
admonishing the women, who were believers, that they should
not make their adorning consist of necklaces, pearls, gold and
silver, and costly raiment,t unless there were those in the
churphes, who were able to procure for themselves expensive
apparel ? And with what consistency too could Lucian remark,
as he does in the passage already cited, that any impostor who
should join the Christians, might easily become rich among
them, had they been a troop of paupers and mendicants ? Nor
were the Christians all ignorant and illiterate men ; they always
had those in their ranks, who could not only speak, but write in
explanation and defence of their principles ; and who in their
public assemblies could discourse upon the subjects of religion
and comment on the Scriptures, although it might not be indeed
m the style of orators, who had been taught the art of rhetoric.

• See Aptor. 18: 31. 33: 39. 35: 19.
1 1 Tim. S: 9. 1 Pet 3: 8.

1888.] Alhtiumi to CkrUiimiiif. &S8

Sometimes also an individual of noble Urth and station appeals
to have joined their number. It is highly probable, that Flavius
Clemens, a consul, cousb of the emperor Domitian, and his
wife, Domitilla, became converts to Christianity. As to the
statement indeed of Dio Cassius, that they had fallen into such
error, as to embrace ta li&tj imp 'loviaiwv, it may be under*
stood alike of the Christian and the Jewish religion. The ac-
cusation however rrii d^eotfitog, which they are said to have
incurred, inclines us to suppose, that the former was meant
rather than the latter; since this charge was often alleged
against the Christians but could not easily apply to' the Jews.^
Still it must certainly be allowed, that the Christians were, for
the most part, from the lower walks of life, and but little ac-
quainted with Grecian and Rotnan letters. For had it been
otherwise, Caecilius, in the Octavius of Minucius Felix, could
neither have said, with all the liberty of exaggerati(»i, which
may be claimed for him as an accuser, that they were collected
from the lowest dregSy nor have addressed to them the language
'T^iehold ; both the greater and better part of yoii, as you your-
sehes say, are in want, suffer cold, cowtempt and Atm^er.f
And in like manner Celsus could have had no pretence for say-
ing, that those who displayed such zeal to proselyte children
and ignorant women, iQ&ovgyovg iipM, sea* anvtorofiov^, na$
n¥afu6, anaidsvtovQ mw a/goi Hotutdvg (that they were wool-
dressers, and leather-cutters and fullers, uneducated and^rustic
men).^ But if there was room even in the age of the Anto-
nines for the application of such language to the Christians, as
Caecilius and Celsus used in reference to them, it is to be still
less expected, that their earlier annals were adorned with the
names either of the learned or the noble. We may imagine
some resemblance in this respect between the primitive churches
and the modem societies of the Mennonites and Quakers*
These latter consisted chiefly of mechanics, artists, and mer-
chants, men of principle and respectability indeed, possessed al-^
so of some information and property, yet in few instances emi-
nent either for learning or birth or opulence. The first churches^
it should be remembered, were small and made up of those^
who not only lived in the shades of private life, but, from thehr

• Dio Cas$ws L. LXVII. o. 14. p. 111% ed. Hamb.

t c a and c 13.

t See Origisus eontra Celsttms L. III. p. 144. ed. Spenc

S94 AOuiiam to Christiaiuiy. [Jak.

constant fear of danger, had every motive to evade rather than
court the public observation. (On this account they are called
by Caecilius a light-fleeing, skulking, speechless tribe.)* They
were established too, not in towns and villages where all things
of a private nature become public, but in large and populous
cities, where the eyes of men notice only that, which b, as it
were, thrust upon their attention. It is easy to conceive, that
the Christians, under such circumstances, may have been utter-
ly unknown to multitudes of their contemporaries. We have
no doubt that there are many in London at this day, who know
nothing in regard to the Quakers or the Baptists ; and we have
ascertained it for a fact, that very many of our own citizens are
ignorant, that there is a small community at Leipsic. who w<»r-
ship in the manner of the Bohemian brethren. In the same
way we suppose that great numbers of the Antiochians, Alex-
andrians, Romans, Athenians, Thessalonians, had at that time
either no knowledge of the Christians, or only such as acquaint-
ed them with their name as Galilaeans, and dieir Jewish origin.
Those things, which neither dazzle the eyes of men by their
splendor, nor awaken in their minds admiration or abhorrence,
nor allure them by the hope of gain and the prospect of plea-
sure, often remain concealed for a long time from the general
view.

But in the age of the Antonines the Christians were no
longer unknown. They ceased, from the time of Trajan, to be
confounded with the Jews, and occupied henceforth a separate
and conspicuous station in the eyes of the world. All those,
who were accustomed to pay any attention to public affiurs,
could not hilt know, that the churches differed entirely from
the synagogues, that the Christians observed rites of religion
peculiar to themselves^ that they abhorred the gods, worshipped
by the heathen, xhat they were bound to each other by stronger
ties, than were those of other sects, that they had been re-
peatedly punished by the magistrates, and treated with indignity
and violence by the multitude in revenge for the contempt,
which they saw cast upon the objects of their worship. At
the same time, most of those, who were aware of these and
similar facts respecting the Christians, imagined that thev saw
nothing in them very remarkable ; and, under this belief, they
of course had no sufficient motive either for investigating their

« See Mmum Fdkit Ootaviu% aa

1638.] jtOunons to ChrisHmity. &95

history or transmitting any information on the subject. So far
certainly as regards tlie novelty of the christian religion, it is
not strange, that it did not arrest and fix the attention of men.
At this very period, in all the large and populous cities, par-
ticularly at Rome and Alexandria, not only foreign rites of
worship, brought from all parts of the earth, Hke those in honor
of Isis and Mithra, were from time to time making their appear-
ance, but frequently new ceremonies (xa$¥M Kkstat) like those
of the Alexander, whom Lucian assailed under the name of
Pseudomantis, were instituted. Nor did it appear wonder-
fiil, that the Christians worshipped the Deity without temples,
altars and images. For the Jews, dispersed throughout the
Roman world, had been accustomed everywhere to offer their
devotions in a similar manner. But little importance again was
attached to the invectives, with which the Christians denounc-
ed the gods of the heathen. In this they were not singular :
for many of the philosophers also despised and ridiculed the gods.
Nor was it deemed a matter, which deserved to interest specially
the public mind, that the Christians suffered at one time from
civil persecution, and at another from the violence of the mul-
titude. The State was thrown into no very serious commotion
either by the tumults of the people, demanding the sacrifice of
their victims, or by the decisions of the judges, dooming them
to death. Those too, who perished in this way, were obscure
men, whose fate was not deemed of sufficient consequence to
merit a place in history.

Add to this, that many of the Greeks and Romans held the
Christians in contempt as the observers of Jewish rites, and also
detested them, both on account of the crimes, which were laid
to their charge, and the insubordbate, restless spirit, which was
supposed to animate them. It is well known, that the Greeks
and Romans regarded the Jews as a barbarous, superstitious, and
illiterate people, and for this reason felt no interest in their oon^
cems. in this way many were led to look upon the Christian
also in the same light ; who, as they derived their reKgion (torn
the Jews, worshipped Jesus Christ, who was bom among the
Jews, acknowledged the prophets of the Jews as the messen^
gers of God, and regulated their ohurobes after the pattern of
file synagogue, were supposed to practise Jewish rites and imi^
tate the manners of the Jews. TV> contempt were fi^quently
added hatred and indignation. Those, who cherished such feeK
ings towards tbero, did in fact but their duty, if they considered

Vol. XI. No. 29, 99

236 AUunons to Chri$tianUy. [Jan.

them really guilty of celebrating feasts, at which they com-
mitted murder and incest. That the suspicion of such guilt was
deeply fixed in the minds of many, may be learned from the
effi>rts of the Apologists, who left no stone unturned in their anx-
iety to clear themselves from these accusations, (^Svicuut
dunva and Oi dinodnoi fitJ^ug, as they are called by the Greeks).
But those, who placed no confidence in uncertain rumor, or
who knew, that these imputations were false, were still dis*
pleased, that men so obscure and illiterate should afiect to be
wise above their condition, and refuse to conform to what the
laws prescribed. This was natural. For it is common for men
in the higher walks of life to censure those things, which are
contrary to the established laws and usages, although, while they
deny the right to others, they themselves assert the liberty of
disregarding and renouncing them, as they please. Hence many,
who discovered but little zeal tliemselves in the worsiiip of the
gods, condemned the Christians for their contempt of the public
services of religion, and pronounced it mere obstinacy, that they
refused to bum incense to the gods, and swear by the divinity
of the emperor.

Such we consider to be the explanation of the fact that roost
of the Greek and Roman writers, even in the age of the An-
tonines, were either entirely silent in respect to the Christians,
or confined their notice of them to brief and cursory allu^ns.
They appeared to observe nothing in them, which was partic-
ularly worthy eitlier of their own attention, or the information
of posterity ; and, as they either despised them, as a branch of
the Jews, or hated them for the infamous crimes, of whbh they
were suspected, and for their seditious spirit, it was impossible,
that they should have been otherwise than hostile to their cause.

But all the Greeks and Romans, who were distinguished for
their attention to letters, did not entertain such an opinbn of
the Christians, or rest satisfied with so superficial a knowledge
of their affaii*s. The Apologies, written by Justin, Melito,
Athenagoras, and others, were composed with too much ability
and dispersed by the Christians with too much zeal, to allow us
to suppose, that they were but little read. Those, therefore,
who had seen these defences, or had met with the Christians
in the intercourse of life, could not have fiuled to know, that
they were not only guiltless of the crimes, with which thOT
were charged, but taught doctrines and rules of omduct, which
accorded with the sentiments of the moat odebrated phtioaopbers.

1838.] Alhuumt to Chriitianiiy. S2T

It may perhaps be further inquired then, why the Christians
found no eulogists among the philosophers, who were superior
to the multitude in wisdom, and entertamed more correct views
upon religious subjects.

The fact now here is, that many of those, who rejected in-
deed the public religion as mere superstition, but still adhered
to its forms as an expression of their reverence for the Deity,
and as an aid to the development of their moral nature, became
not merely eulogists of the Christians, but in very deed Chris-
tians themselves. Of this number were Quadratus, Aristides,
Melito, Justin, Tatian, Athenagoras, Theophilus, Minucius Fe-
lix, and many others, who, natives either of Syria, or Greece, or
Egypt, or Africa, adopted the christian faith, transferred to the
church their various accomplishments in Grecian and Roman
science, and, especially in the age of the Antonines, advocated
the cause of the Christians. AH these men, averse indeed to
the public belief, yet possessing minds ever wakeful on religious
subjects, joined the christian church, because it presented to
them views of truth, to which their hearts responded, because
it spread before them a sacred history, which bore, as it were,
the marks of a witness and messenger of the Deity, and pre-
scribed to its members, united in the bonds of a common faith
and mutual love, the duties, which are best suited to the culti-
vation of a pious spirit. No inconsiderable number, therefore,
who had been enabled by the aid of Grecian philosophy to rise
to more worthy conceptions of religion than those of the multi-
tude, cordially approved and embraced the doctrines of Chris-
tianity. But those philosophers, who became Christians, are
to be classed, not among the Greeks and Romans, who are the
subjects of our present inquiry, but among the Christian wri-
ters, whom it would be out of place here to notice.

Others however of this class, and those by far the majority,
took a diflferent view ; they condemned the Christian rites and
withheld from them every expression of their sympathy and
favor. Some of them did this from their regard to the authority
of law and custom which weighed with them far more than the
acknowledged defects of the public religion ; and others again,
from the contempt, in which they held every thing sacred.

Of this number were the Stoics and Platonists, who preceded
the Neo-l^latonists so called xor* i^oxv^* The Platonists of
these times, as Plutarch, Alcinous, Apuleius, and the Stoics, as
Arrian and Marcus Antoninus, having derived from philosophy

228 AUuiiant to Christianiiy. [Jah.

many correct notions of religious truth, perceived, that the
mythic fictions contained much that was absurd and equally
unworthy of gods and men, favored the idea, that the worship
of the Deity depended on the state of the mind, rather than on
the performance of external services, and distinguished very
justly between «t/a«/7««a and d€iOida$fiov$a. In the works of
jPlutarch especially there occur many noble sentiments on re-
ligious subjects, showing that he and those like him had advan-
ced beyond the multitude in their conceptions of truth, and
taught not a few principles very similar to those of the christian
religion. But most ot these philosophers were unwilling, that
the established forms of worship should be abandoned, and others
substituted for them. They revered them, because they were
supported by law and custom ; and feared, lest if their national
and ancient institutions should give place to those of foreign and
recent origin, it might derange the whole order and frame of
society. For this reason they either considered it the part of a
wise man to follow philosophy as his guide in private life, but
in public life to conform to the laws and worship in the ancient
manner, or to endeavor, by divesting the received mythology of
its literal sense, and understanding it to teach only physical and
moral truths, or by distinguishing between daemons and gods
and referring to the former every thing of an unworthy nature,
to improve the public religion and harmonize it with the doc-
trines of philosophy. Those now, who thought and did thus,
could not have patronized the cause of the Christians, nor have
appeared as the eulogists of those, who were despising the
public rites, who were censuring, and ridiculing them, and pre-
paring the way for their ruin. Many things indeed taught by
the Christians they approved as perfectly agreeable to right
reason. But they were of the opinion, that a knowledge of di-
vine and human subjects was to be sought, not from the Chris-
tians, but from the philosophers of their own country, far ex-
celling in their estimation both in acuteness and eloquence the
prophets of the Jews and the apostles, founders of the christian
church. Thus the cause of the Christians was not favored even
by those philosophers, who approached very nearly to them in
•the sentiments which they entertained.

But those, by whom sacred rites of every description were
tdespised, and all religion accounted as superstition, had still oth-
>er reasons either for neglecting or censuring the followers of
Christ. To this class belonged the Epicureans, and Cynics ;

1838.] AButiom to ChriiHmUjf^ S99

which is learned not (Hily fiom Plutarch, who frequently char-
acterises the Epicureans as d^iovg^ and censures severely* their
yiXwtag and x^^^^MOv, but also from the example of Lucian,
who embraced the Epicurean philosophy. For Lucian not on-
ly ridiculed the heathen mythology, exhibited the Grecian gods
in a ridiculous light and held up to contempt the public ceremo-
nies, but also especially in those treatises, of which one is entitled
Zevg iieyx^fififog, the other Zsvg Tgayft^doQf argued against reli-
gion itself, and endeavored to subvert the doctrine of a Divine
Being, who is interested in the concerns of men.f Philoso-
phers now, discarding thus the idea of a Divine power, could
not but have extended that contempt which they felt for all re-
ligion, to the christian religion also, and have turned with ab-
horrence from those, whom they considered either as the authors
or supporters of a new superstition. Nor did those attacks,
which were made by the Christians upon the prevalent errors,
have any special tendency to conciliate their favor. They sup-
posed, that they themselves, following in the steps of Eveme*
rus and other philosophers of past times, had fully discovered
and proved the vanity, senselessness and absurdity of the mythic
system.

It is therefore sufficiently accounted for, that the Christians
even at that time, when they had now become generally known,
found, not a few followers indeed, but no eulogists uid advo*
cates amcmg the philosophers.

But those of these philosophers, who felt such a disFike to
the Christians, because they were unwilling, that the public
rites, established by law and custom, should be disturbed and
abolished, appear to have had appropriate reasons, not so much
for neglecting to speak of their adG&irs, as for arraigning the cor--
rectness of their opinions. For the Christians surely were pre*

Jaring the way for the ruin of those rites : their poets, known
y the name of Sibyllists, were, in imitation of the author of the
Apocalypse, predicting it ; and their apologists, seeking the
same result in every possible way, made no secret of the fact,
that they too desired it, that they prayed and labored, that aU
would abandon the temples and altars of idols and turn to the
true God. It may therefore be very properly asked, why no
one, except Cebus, (for Crescens and Fronto appear to have

* See bis book de Oraciiloruro Delectu, c. 19.

t See perttealarly bis Zeus Tragoedus^ o. 43—49. p. 694-^096.
Tem. II. ed. RtUz.

880 Attunant to Ckritiiamiif. [Jait.

merely personated the character of assailants and accusers), en-
deavored to convict the Christians of error, and defend the pub-
lic religion against them. Those, who might have done this,
we answer, appear to have neglected it, because thev supposed,
that there was but little to be feared from the Christians. For-
eign religious rites had been often introduced, and the Jewish
ceremonies had already been a long time practised without any
danger to the public religion. The Christians, few in number,
suspected by the magistrates, odious to the multitude, and not
protected indeed by public law from the fear of punishment,
seemed not to be the persons, who were to overturn those insti-
tutions, which had been received from their fathers, which were
guarded by the authority of the State, which had become sa-
cred through the veneration of ages. No one could at that time
have easily predicted, that domestic usages were soon to give
place to foreign ; ancient, to modem ; Greek and Roman, to
those, which had sprung from Judea, and that the opinions of
mtnkind, the laws of the empire, and the religion of the whole
Roman world, were about to be changed by the efforts of the
Christians. The christian church, in all its early progress, was
weak ; and even in the age of the Antonines was so destitute
of the influence, arising either from numbers or the support of
literary men, that it could have presented no very threatening
aspect towards the rites of paganism, with whatever earnestness
it might have sought their overthrow. There seemed to be no
occasion for the pen in opposing those, who were falling by the
sword. There were a few indeed of such sagacity, that, like
Celsus, they saw, that the elements of a mighty revolution were
concealed in the principles of the Christians ; but for the most
part they were deceived by the external appearance of things,
and supposed that their few and feeble churches would soon be
exterminated. It was a mistake, into which men are liable to
fidl, who estimate by number and weight the power of what de-
pends upon human thought and volition.

Still further ; those, who were unwilling that the public rites
should be disturbed and abolished, are not to be considered as
having been so attached to them, that they would not sufier
any thing to be said in disparagement of them. Neither against
Oenomaus, who in the time of Hadrian assailed the art of divi-
nation,* nor against Lucian, who in the age of the Antonines

* His book, of which firaguients by no means iQconsiderable have
been preserved by Eusebiiis in his Praeparatio Evangelical L. V. eap.

1838.] AUutiani to ChrisUanky. 831

ridiculed and exposed the gods, did any come forward to de-
fend the religion of their fathers. Besides, it was no easy mat-
ter to restore the Grecian theology, neglected as it had long
been, and reconcile with philosophy a religion, which was found-
ed upon the senses and in many respects directly at variance
with correct reason. It cannot therefore appear singular, that
in the age of the Antonines no one, except Celsus, supported
the cause of the public religion by attacking the opinions of the
Christians. For although the Platonists were every where nu-
merous, yet it was not until the third century that the Neo-
Platonic philosophy, which fiimished the defenders of the na-
tional faith with the most convenient weapons, began at length
to prevail.

The examination, into which we have thus gone, furnishes a
satisfactory answer, we think, to the question, which we propo-
sed to consider. It has been our design to treat it in such a
way, that it might be seen, that it is no discredit to Christianity,
that it so rarely attracted the attention of Greek and Roman
writers. Unless we are deceived, we tiave not failed to accom-
plish our purpose. For we think, that it is abundantly evident
irom what has been said, that the authors, of whom we have
spoken, had either absolutely no reasons for mentioning the
Christians, or such as would lead them to do it but very seldom.

But the fewer the facts, which we learn from these authors,
in reference to the christian cause, the more highly should we
prize the writings of the apostles, apostolic &thers, and apolo-
gists, of which, fortunately we have such ample remains. By
the perusal and study of these records of early Christianity, we
may fully acquaint ourselves with the progress and arguments
of the primitive believers. So far from its being adverse to the
truth, nothing, on the contrary, contributes so much to excite
the mind to its contemplation, as familiarity with the history of
the ancient church.

18 aqq. L. VI. c. 6 sqq., was entitled, ipoffa yotiiwf, detection of im-
postors. Cf. Fabncii Bibl. Graec. Vol. III. p. 5^ sq. ed. HarUi.

Old and New TeitamefUs* [Jait.

ARTICLE XI..
CoNirccTioN or the Old and New Tbbtakkiitb.

Trusl«t«4 from Um G«nD«n of ProfMsor TwatUn of Berlin. By B. & Edwtrda, Pvofi

of Hebrew, Theological Bemioarj, Andover.

hUroductory Remarks^ by the Translator.

[Professor Twesten^ now in the chair of theolo^iy recently
filled by Schleiermacher in the university of Berlin, is one of the
most distinguished evangelical theologians of Germany, though
his writings are not very numerous. He was horn at Gliickstadt
on the 11th of April, 1789. His earliest education was ao-

auired at the Latin school of his native place ; he then pursued
be study of philology and theology at the university of Kiel,
in Denmark, from which he received, in 1812, the honorary
degree of doctor in philosophy. He then went to Berlin, where
he came into particular connection with Schleiermacher from
whose theological turn of mind, he received an important influ-
ence. In the same year he became a teacher of a gymnasium
in Berlin, and, in 1813, inspector in a similar institution. In
1814, he left Berlin, and became professor extraordinarius of
philosophy and theology at Kiel, in 1819, he became profes-
sor ordinarius of theology in the same university. In 1826,
the university of Bonn gave him the degree of doctor in theology.
In the same year, he received the order of knighthood, and in
1827, he was chosen a member of the philosophical society of
Copenhagen. He declined several invitations to professorships
firom various universities, among which were Bonn and Gottin-

fen. In 1836, on the decease of Schleiermacher, he removed to
terlin. His not very numerous publications are confined to
philology, theology, and philosophy. His only publication in
the first named branch is a critical commentary on Hesiod's
Works and Days, Kiel, 1815. In 1818, he published a book
on Symbolik, and in 1819, in conjunction with the pastor
Harms of Kiel, a work on the Augsburg Confession, in Ger-
man and Latin. He showed himself to be a clear and profound
thinker by his Logic, printed at Sleswig in 1825. In 185t6, he
published an account of the Evangelical Lutheran Theological
Seminary at Gettysburg, Pa. From 1815 to 1819, he was

1838.] Old and New Te$tamenU. $i38

an active contributiMr to a periodical at Kiel Q* Eieler Blatter).
In addition to his literary labors and his services as an academi*-
cal teacher, he was quite efficient as a member of society at
Kiel, particularly in the concerns of the poor, in which he
showed an uncommon practical talent.

His principal publication in theology, unquestionably, is his
Lectures on Dogmatic, (Vorlesungen iiber die Dogmatik), pub-
lished at Hamburg in 1826. Only one volume has yet ap*
peared. The third edition of this volume was published in
1834, b the prefiice to which we have the promise of an early
appearance of the first part of the second volume. The con-
tents of the first volume are, I. A general Introduction, embrace
ing, the nature of religion, the connection of knowledge with
religbn, the christian, the biblical and the Lutheran dogmatks,
importance of the Lutheran dogmatic for theologians, closer
view of its design, reference of the Lutheran creed to the Bible,
relation between the Lutheran creed and those of other sects,
relation of dogmatic to philosophy, and relation of dogmatic to
the office of preaching in the church. II. An Historico-Criti-
cal Introduction, including a survey of the progress of Chris-
tianity to our times, Catholicism, Protestantism, review g[ the
history of christian dogmatic — first period from Peter Lombard
to Melancthon — second from Melancthon to Semler, — third
from Semler to our times. Our author then proceeds to dis-
cuss the principles and character of Protestantism. The first
or critical pc^ion of the work treats of the sources of religious
truth, under the subdivisions of — authority of the Holy Scrip-
tures, connection of the Old and New Testaments, divinity <^
the Scriptures — revelation — inspiration, sacred canon, inter-
prefoticm of the Scriptures, and the right use of reason.

A translation of the second of these subdivisions, we now
present to our readers. Translator.]'

CoNNxcxioiv of tbb Old and Njbw Testaments.

Under the name of the Holy Scriptures, which we expound
as the rule of theology and as the source of our knowledge of
it, we include not merely the writing^ composed by the apos-
tles or their disciples, which refer to the establishment of the
christian religion and church — the Scriptures of the New Tes-
tament— but also the religious documents of the Jews — the

Vol. XL No. 29. 30

234 Old and New Testaments. [Jam.

writings of the Old Testament or Covenant.* Hereb we fol-
low the authority of Christ and the apostles, who -refer to the
laws, precepts, ordinances, prophecies of the Old Testament,
and derive then" arguments from thence.f They indicate its
sentiments as those of God, or of the Holy Spirit ;| they ex-
pressly establish its validity, or recommend its use.^

Still, there is another aspect in the reli^^ous constitution of
the Old Testament, which is represented in the Ne^ as imper-
feet, 2 Cor. 3: 6 seq., Heb. 8: 6 seq. ; as the first rudiments,
Gah 4: 3, 9 ; as a mere preparatory or intermediate stage in re-
ligious education, which as Christians we have passed over,
Gah 3: 23, seq., and as something now antiquated and dissolved,
Heb. 8: ]3. 2 Cor. 3: 11. Thus the writings in question can-
not come to us in the shape of a rule of faith and practice like
the New Testament, and hence we have the problem, otherwise
worthy of attention, to determine how we are to regard these
writings from the standpoint of christian theology ?

Since it is no other than Christ himself by whom we are de-
livered, not merely from sm, but from the darkness of our un-
derstanding and heart, so must we look especially to him, in or-
der to arrive at the light of true knowledge, and then to those
persons who propagated and established what he commanded^-
the apostles and their disciples, whose writings are contained in
the New Testament. But the appearance of Christ does not
stand isolated. He is the object and aim of a series of divine
preparations, which point to the redemption of men. For, as
the divine determination in respect to redemption and expiation
must be regarded as eternal, so must its accomplishment have
commenced along with the fall of man. Btit since every thing
in the world follows the laws of its being which God would not

* The Vulgate translates the Greek dui&i]jtti by the word tesinh
mentum^ — as though the covenant estahlished by the Deity was
intended to be in close connection with the Mosaic religious dispen-
sation, from which the name and the idea were transferred to Chris-
tianity when the old covenant ceased. Heb. 9:15. 12:34. Matt.
26: 28, not without reference Iq Jer. 81: 31. Comp. Heb. 8: 8 seq.

t Luke 10: 26. 16:29. 20:37,42. 24 : 35— 27, 44--47. John 5:
39, 46. Acts 2: 25-^1. 28: 23,— also particularly in the epistles.

t Matt. 15: 4—6. Acts 3: 18, 21. 4: 25. 1 Cor. 9: 8. Heb. 1: 1.
3: 7. 10: 15. 1 Pet 1: 10—12, etc.

§ Matt. 5: 17. Luke 16: 17. 2 Tim. 3: 14— la 2 Pet. 1: 19.

1838.] Old and New Testamenti. SIS

abolish, and since the weak eyes of men cannot look directly
on the divine light in its full clearness, therefore, God has
brought our race through certain stages of moral and religious
development, till finally the Saviour himself appeared, and the
mystery of redemption in which are hidden all the treasures of
wisdom and knowledge, Col. 2: 3, was fully disck)sed. This
determines our view of the conduct of the people from whom
the salvation was to proceed, John 4: 22 ; of the counsels
which imparted it ; of the arrangements which were entered into
in regard to it, and of the writings in which these things are
recorded. Thus the exhibitions of the divine will, fixxn which
proceeded the determmation respecting redemption, are ever
becoming clearer ; and the wisdom by which this salvation was
accomplished, has made out in the writings of the Old and New
Testaments one code of divine revelations, which display to us
the preparations made by God for our redemption from begin-
ning to end in connection. These preparations must be so ap-
Erehended by us, that we can righdy understand the last and
ighest of them, and so that the coming of Christ will operate
on us in the same manner as it did on his first disciples. Since
Christ found his people prepared for himiself by means of
these holy writings, and since he had) in his own behalf, a great-
er witness than that of Moses and the prophets— -even the tes-
timony of God in the works which were appointed unto him to
fulfil, John 5: 36, so the effects of the one are by no means to
be separated from those of the others. As Christ was thence-
forth preached unto the heathen, they at the same time receiv-
ed the writbgs of the Old Testament ; to these, in addition he
annexed the annunciation of the gospel, and even after this had
gained an entrance, it would be difficult to reckon how many
were won to the fi^th by means of the Old Testament, or by
it were confirmed ; — ^in respect to which many explicit testi-
monies both of modem and ancient tiroes have come to us. What
is so^connected in contents and in effect, we may be allowed to
discriminate, though not to divide. And since we are now to
distinguish, and to inquire, how far the Old Testament can be
regarded as the rule of faith and life fcnr Christians, we may
consider the question under two divisions.

1. The Old Testament contains divine revelations and pre-
cepts. But God can reveal nothing which is not true : be can
order nothing which is not holy and good and important for
those who seek information in respect to truth and goodness*

^6 Old and New Testaments. [Jah.

Yet every thing is not revealed at the beginning. Till man is
susceptible of higher manifestations, God must condescend to
his infirmity ; the divine precepts must always be adapted to
man's actual progress in education, until he is ripened for a
more perfect state. Hence we must compare the earlier reve-
lations and ordinances with the later — ^those of the Old Testa-
ment with those of the New, and give attention to the points
where the former are true and valid, where they are fully inter-
preted and completed, where they are modified or abolished.

In this, however, is rather contained a necessity to come to a
reply to the proposed inquiry, than the answer itself. This
can be stated precisely

2. In a direct and obvious canon : The information and the
precepts of the Old Testament are of authority for us so far as
they point to one and the same religion contained in the Old
Testament as is contained in the New ; they are not of validity
so far as the religion of the Old Testament stands in opposition
to that of the New.

It is, indeed, in itself clear, that the christian life and con-
sciousness, so far as it differs throughout from those of the pious
Israelites, can draw no nourishment from that by which tlie lat-
ter was ordered or exhibited ; but whatever sentiment or knowl-
edge does not contribute to advance us in the faith, to which God
has called us through Christ, cannot be regarded as intended by
him for us.

Now the religion of the Old and New Testament is one m
i^ation to its monotheistic-dogmatic character, i. e. it is such a
religion as elevates itself to the recognition of one true God,
which lies at the foundation of the most important motives of
our moral consciousness, and which, ripened into reflection, was
sufficient to enable an individual, in the rejection of polytheism,
to strive after the truth. We are also to bring into account the
materials for the development of the religious consciousness
which exist in monotheism. Also, as the code of precepts ex-
pands itself, we are to consider the subjective principle of reli-
gious earnestness and love of truth which are therein predomi-
nant. This brings us to the perpetual validity of the instruc-
tions of the Old Testament in respect to universal religious
truths, the being of God, his will, works and attributes,— like-
wise the universal rules and precepts which are set up for the
direction of men as called to act or to suffer ; — ^instructions and
precepts which are presupposed in the New Testament, although

1838.] Old and New Testaments. 237

there illustrated in a more complete manner, and brought forward
in connection with the peculiar truths of Christianity and by them
more exactly defined.

Still, whatever may be these peculiarities, we are by no
means to place the New Testament in opposition to the Old.
The instructions and preparations of the latter are not merely
introductory steps to Christianity, but contain Christianity itself
in a certain sense, whatever may be their introductory charac-
ter. As preliminary to what is not yet completely fulfilled,
they are only that in which lies the germ, m which still, though
the perfect acc(»nplishment is not yet reached, there is a capa-
city in itself for further enlargement and development ; and
whatever is essential to religion as it were completes itself in
Christianity ; or, as we may further expand the idea, whatever
belongs to the essential conditions of our salvation cannot be
entirely wanting in a religion revealed by Crod. We see, m*
deed, in nature how the inferior forms of animal organization
point to the highest — to the type of the human form. Thus
the Jewish religious community differed from the Christian in
its mingling with political afi&irs, in its reference to the particu*
lar relations and needs of this people, in its temple-service and
priesthood. Still, here we find as it were a preformative influ-
ence. The religious condition of the Jews conceals under a
sensible covering the essential ideas of a christian theocracy, of
which Christ is to be the head. In the religious life of a pious
Israelite we recognize the elements of a spirit kindred to our-
selves. In short, we see Christianity in a certain sense previ-
ous to Christ.* But in order to place together in its appropri-
ate light the real differences between the Old and New Testa-
ments, we must anticipate a little what is in the sequel still fur-
ther illustrated.

Christianity requires, that along with the consciousness of our
sinfulness, of our desert of punishment, as well as of our impo-
tence, we should embrace Uhrist with a full faith, in order that
we may be happy and blameless in his strength, through whom
(jod has reconciled the world unto himself, and gives unto us a
higher power through which we overcome sin. Now what is
peculiar to this faith is, that it leads us to Christ. Therefore,
that which summons us to believe is the recognition of the di-
vine mercy in Christ — the gospel in its appropriate sense as

* Or as MeUnetbon aays : ^ Ever since the creation of man, there
has been t^ne and a perpetual church of Grod."

238 Old and New TestamenU. [Jah.

the means by which christian piety is produced in us,— and this
is the substance of the New Testament. But faith cannot be
of a superior kind without a higher development of the moral
consciousness, which is indeed advanced by it, but which is pre-
supposed to a certain degree. Now, can any one perceive the
worth and greatness of the divine mercy, who is not deeply im-
pressed with the fact that the anger and wrath of God are di-
rected against us on account of our sins, who does not acknow-
ledge with deep pain the greatness of his guilt ? How can one
seek for higher aid, who has not learned by experience that
he cannot help himself? Indeed, would not fiuth in redemp-
tion, instead of giving consolation to the sorrowful and despair-
ing, rather affi)rd aid to the thoughtless, and be a sort of offiet
to man for his imperfections, while he is a stranger to the an-
guish of a terrified c(»iscience and to true repentance ? Hence
the gospel first exerts a saving influence when man has been
brought through another school — the school of the law^ which
places before him the strictness of the divine command and the
severity of the divine justice. This for the Israelites was the
school of the Mosaic, divine economy — the cardinal idea of the
Old Testament.

Still, God did not permit them to want revelations of mercy
and grace, though in a great degree in the form and under the
shadow of the law. Yet, this legal, sacred economy with its
ceremonies and observances was arranged, not merely that
through these external means, a revelation of Grod might be
maintained and that purity preserved which be requires of his
people, but also in order that the repentant nnner might be led
to him to seek through him fireedom from guilt and pollution —
the emblem of the greater sacrifice which was afterwards to be
offered up for the sins of the world. It was under the shadow
of the law ; — so that the posterity of Abraham, being held to-
gether by a covenant embracing political and religious regula-
tions, might not only retain a belief in the true God, while reli-
gion degenerated and became disfigured by the general preva-
lence of idolatry, but also that a prospect might be kept open
towards the more perfect revelation, and that circumstances
might be in readiness for the Redeemer to commence his benevo-
lent labors. Under the protecting shadow of the law, the germ
oi faith in the divine mercy was preserved and developed it-
self—a faith, indeed, which from tne beginnmg had not refer-
ence merely to the existing time, but extended into futurity.

1888.] Old md Nek> Te$Ument$.

and gndually passing over the limits of the law, and evennore
fonning itself in such a manner so that in the end nothing was
wanting to bring the true Israelite to Chrbt, but the joyful ivgti^
Kofitp^ John 1 : 42, 46.

Promises had been made to the patriarchs besides those which
received their accomplishment during the lives of their descen-
dants. Moses had given the sustaining hope of higher revela-
tions to such as might be anxiously waiting for them, when he
referred die people to a prophet who should come after him..
The ideal image of a theocratic king which hovered before the
vision of the holy songsters in their hymns, was of a loftier kind
than could be realized in David or Solomon. Still less could
circumstances, as they presented themselves in the following pe-
riod of degeneracy and degradation, satisfy the earnest, longing
mind of the pious and wise among the people. The harder
the fortunes were which pressed upon them, the firmer and
more trustingly they fastened on a condition of things delineated
in prophecy, where God, having forgiven his people, would
send them a Saviour, not merely from external oppression and
poverty, but also from their religious and moral degeneracy ;-~
not simply to restore the ancient religion in its purity, but to
establish a new covenant, his Spirit being poured out upon all,
and all nations being led to know him. These prophetic delin-
eations are such that we are led to the conclusion, that even
when the prophets had in their minds persons or events of their
own times, the Spirit which was in them, 1 Pet. I : 11, inteiv-
ded and foretold something different. This longing hope for a
fiitiu^ salvation, this dwelling on the image of a perfect theocra-
cy, which found constantly new nourishment in the predictions
of the Old Testament, and which could be shaken by no mis-
take respecting the true time, (a mistake which has been no*
ticed as not uncommon in respect to human nature,) while
it did not remain free from impure mixtures, still maintained its-
foundations in truth. This has always remained a pecuKar-
tty m the Jewish people ; a trait in the highest degree r&>
maricable, which, as it appears to us, must lead them sooner or
later fit>m Moses on to Christ.

We thus find announced in the Old Testament, not merely^
the divine mercy in general, but mercy in its reference to a
future, more pemct revelatkxi of the same as it appeared in
Christ ; and also the idea, which could not feel itself to be sat-
isfied in the existing religious constitution, but which hoped for

840 out and New Tettomenti. [Jah.

a new coveoant, and for that higher development of the divine
kingdom which followed in Christ, — intimated indeed in the
precepts of the law, and which was unveiled more clearly in the
promises of the prophets. So far we can say that the religion
of the Old and New Testaments is the same in its true sub-
stance ; not only in relation to its origin, (as we trace both back
to divine revelations), but in reference to its object— ^the Mes-
siah to whom the Old Testament points — ^when not directly yet
mediately. They differ in relation to this point, only as the Old
Testament pomts to one who is to come ; the New, makes known
one who has already appeared, (though not without reference
to another period still future, 1 Cor. 11: 26. The one, indeed,
contained the principal lineaments of the idea, but the actual
appearance (the humanity of Christ, the Mediator) could be
anticipated only by significant images, whUe, on the contrary,
the other places him before our eyes, as he dwelt among us full
of grace and truth, John 1: 14. Hence the New Testament
is truly the key <^ the Old, and must open for us, (as Christ
did once for the apostles Luke 24: 27,) the idea of its true con-
tents. Still, however, to the enlightened mind, which knows to
what object all things cend, the Old Testament will ever be able,
as in the case of Timothy, 2 Tim. 3: 15, to make wise unto sal-
vation, not by works of the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ*

But in as far as the Old Testament is particularly an incul-
cation of the law, so iar we may say, its religion is in contrast
to that of the New Testament. As Christians we are not un-
der xb/b law, but under grace, Rom. 6: 14, — yet not as if
Christ did not demand what is essential in the law, Matt. 7: 12.
22: 40. Christ came not to destroy the law, but to fulfil it,
Matt. 5: 17 ; yea, the righteousness of Christians must be more
perfect than that of the Pharisees, Matt. 5: 20, who observed
the law in the strictest manner. Acts 26: 5. But Christianity
demands a dbposition which is not meant to be able to work out
its own righteousness by the deeds of the law, (a fiindamental mis-
take of the Jews, Rom. 10: 3), but to receive by fiuth the right-
eousness of Christ, in like manner as Paul, Phil. 3: 9, — and
which requires that it be done with inward freedom, without
the letter of the law, which the law aspired after, and which, ac-
companied by threatenings of Divine punishment, prescribes in
external methods, what we have to do and to sufifer. Where this
is still wanting, there is no true Christianity ; there still, the
opposing lust of the flesh predominates over the spirit, and not

r

1838.] Old and New Testaments. t41

the spirit over the flesh, while the latter from the first gradoallv
frees us from sin and from the law, Gal. 5: 17, 18, ^. And,
indeed, for him who has not yet come to the point where the
most earnest language of the law has a salutary effect, as well
as the alluring voice of the gospel,* a part of the law has lost
its validity ; its destination has become merely preparatory,— >
partly political, which must have given to the Jewish theocracy
an external support till the Author and Head of the true cbris«
tian theocracy appeared, — and partly ritual, which could only
preserve the need of redemption and expiation, until he came
who could alone satisfy that need. In reference hereto, Christ
isy with peculiar propriety, named, not only tlie object, but the
end of the law, Rom. 10 : 4. So then who among us has
occasion for the law as a schoolmaster and a tutor, Gal.
4: 24. 5: 2 ? He does not aspire after the freedom of the
children of God, who has already found it in the christian church,
which ceases not to make known the righteousness and mercy
of God, not merely through the preaching of the divine word,
but in its very existence and through its entire manifestation.

Thus we may now easily see, how far the Old Testament
can be yet for us a rule of faith and life. We here speak, not
of its worth in respect to a learned acquaintance with the histo-
ry of religion, or for a learned commentary on the New Testa-
ment, (its historical and hermeneutical use, although this has an
important aspect, not merely for learned men, but for every
Christian). We speak especially of its value for religion itself,
in so far as it can always secure for us an incitement to pious
feeling, as awakening those dispositions on which depend the fear
of God, love, confidence, self-knowledge, faith, obedience, and
as it respects the desire to seek for information concerning God,
his mercy and righteousness, his law and promises. This is its
doctrinal and moral use. Then, indeed, we ought always to
recollect that the special object of the New Testament is not to
make known to u& the law, but the gospel, not in dark images
and predictions, but in the clear light of actual fulfilment.
There is present with us one who is greater than the lawgiver, or
the priests, the kings and prophets of the Old Testament, Luke
10:24. 11:31,32. Heb. iii. and vii., through whom mercy
and truth have come, John 1: 17, from whose fulness, a living

* So the Lutheran Catechism rightly places the ten commandments
before faith.

Vol. XI. No. 29. 31

242 Old and New Teitaments. [Jak.

fountain of new life and of higher knowledge streams forth on
those who believe upon him, John 7: 38. It is not, simply, how-*
ever, that there is a revelation of the hitherto concealed and se»
cret mysteries of the divine counsels, Rom. 16: 25. Eph. 3: 15.,
but also that tlie covering w as removed away from those things,
which even to the prophets themselves, who predicted the grace
that was to come, was rather a point for investigation and search
than a clear vision, 1 Pet. 1 : 10. It is now settled not only in rela-
tion to that which is old and abolished, but also in what manner
that is to be understood which contains profounder and more per-
manent truth. It cannot therefore be doubted that there is in the
New Testament a far more perfect norm and source of christian
knowledge, than in the Old. The one is an original fountain, the
other a secondary one. * We would as little over-estimate the
latter, on the one hand, by drawing from it alone the whole
system of christian faith, f as, on the other hand, unite in under-
valuing it, in which extreme we find some of the Gnostics, who
went so far as to ascribe to it a wholly difierent design from the
revelations which were made by Christ ;— consequently on the
ground, that though the Old Testament had a divine origin, yet
it was limited (according to the opinions of the anabaptists and
some other modern sects) to things merely earthly and sensual
— to the exclusion of a spiritual germ. This view is in opposi-
tion to Christ and his apostles, with whom the Xvaai was ever
the nkfi()waui ; the xarap/v/oai was always placed in connection
with the atfjuah Rom. 3: 31. The effect has been to obstruct
the right interpretation of the New Testament.

Of the former error — a one-sided, over-estimate of the Old
Testament, we can by no means acquit our older theologians,
either as it regards their view of the Old Testament in general,
or their handling of particular passages. It was not enough to
find the germ of the peculiar laws of Christianity in the Old Tes-
tament ; the entire delineation must be discovered, (t was not
simply concluded, that we must find a general reference to
Christ, but also that futurity was clearly revealed to the pious

* With this readily agrees Schleieniiacber's Ansicht von der nor-
nialen MignitUt des A If ens Testaments, Darstell. des Gla. § 150
Zusaiz.

f As was attempted to be done on the broadest scale by John
Wigaod and Matth. Judex in their Syntagma or Corpus doctrinae ex
V. T. tantum collecturo, dispositum et concinnatum, Basil. 1564. Par-
ticular examples may be found in the older systems.

1838.] Old and New Testainents. 843

men among the Israelites. Even the reformers, who so beau-
ufuUy developed the t^ontrast between the law and the gospel,
were not always sufficiently guarded on this point. To such
views must they be led, who accommodate themselves to what
are often arbitrary and fanciful modes of interpretation ; — where,
without regard to the context, a forced interpretation is at once
given to the letter ; very remote resemblances, to the prejudice
of the natural meaning of the word, are valued, and the truth
which lies at the ground of the typical and prophetic meaning,
is so disfigured, that the principle must always occasion mis-*
takes in the application. When now, on the other hand, a con-
tradiction is assumed, partly by entire sects, e. g. the Arminians
and Socinians, and partly by particular individuals of our church,
e. g. Calixtus ; when these contradictions are drawn out into
particulars, because individual doctrines, e. g. that of the trinity,
cannot be found explicitly announced in the Old Testament ;
even when the belief of the pious men in the Old Testament
is declared to be only a belief indirectly in Christ ; — ^we cannot
indeed, approve of every thing which lies at the foundation of
such expressions as the foregoing, or which is introduced in con-
nection with them, — ^yet neither can we entirely throw them
aside, as the older theologians did. We cannot truly charge
those who advance them with intentional unfairness, while they
employ the historical mode of interpretation in opposition to
a pseudo-dogmatic — while they follow out the principle, that,
in connection with the application of generally received her-
meneutical rules, one must seek to investigate what the writers
themselves intended, as they were understood by their contem-
poraries, without daring to introduce any later views or notions.
We censure such modes of interpretation only as would destroy
the most undeniable connection between the Old and New Te^
taments, which recognizes in the former nothing of a higher
character, and which willingly allows the most violent mode of
proceeding, ere it will concede any references to Christ, — white
it maintains that the New Testament is so essentially different
from the Old.

The error of the older theologians, we would avoid, inasmuch
as we do not directly maintain that the religion of the Old Tes-
tament is identical with that of the New, or that its writings,
like those of the New, treat altogether of Christ ; but this iden-
tity appears only so far as it [the Old Testament] is the norm
and the source of religious truth for us.

Si44 Old and New Testaments. [Jan.

We thus throw no obstacle in the way of the historical inter-
pretation, but merely place it, (without determining at the out-
set its extent,) on the principles of the New Testament, — the
christian interpretation ; — in the position which we are fully
ready to justify. Here, especially, we must not consider mere-
ly what circumstances are in favor of a particular position, but
how they bear upon and stand related to another — the teleo-'
logical method of considering the subject. Now, as little as the
naturalist allows himself to be satisfied, when he regards plants
and animals merely from that point of view in which they pro-
mote the convenience or luxury of men, so little will a sound
understanding allow itself to be persuaded, that a final end is
cmly an accidental result of a process, without any intention be-
ing aimed at by the Author of nature. The natural philosopher
knows well, that the higher formations in the series of organized
development are from the lower, so that the one casts light on
the other, and that it is certain, that the right means have not
been employed for understanding the natural history of an or-
gan, when it lias been considered separate from its earlier con-
dition, and no investigation has been had into its previous state.
Even so no reflecting man will object, when we assert that the
fundamental ideas and objections which are found in the dog-
mas and contests of philosophers ^e. g. one may remember the
controversy respecting innate ideas) are the same which occu-
py ourselves, although we are considerably advanced in the
Knowledge of their meaning, and in the modes of expressing
them. Why then in the writings of divinely inspired lawgivers
and prophets, should we dare to see only what the lexicons and
grammars spell out from words ? Liong and rightfully has the
important idea been inculcated, that the books of the Bible are
to be read as we read other writings. Must we on that account
wholly forget, that they are divine w ritings ?

Finally, the inquiry concerning the Connection between the
Old and New Testaments, (which has been handled, to a wide
extent, and in many contraversies, the true grounds of which by
no means lie where the words employed would seem to imply,)
has been so developed, that we must here satisfy ourselves, to
have indicated the principal point, in the critical examination of
the Old Testament Scriptures in their relation to the christian
church. We cannot here introduce the marked difference, as-
serted by Paul, Gal. 3: 15 seq., between the Abrahamic cove-
nant and that of Moses, and their relations with each other and

1838.] IMon Bibk Dtctionarif. S4&

with that of Christ, though this would be a subject not un*
important in itself, nor in its bearing on the controversies of both
the Protestant sects, [the Calvinists and the Lutherans]. One
thing, however, will demand in the sequel a fuller examination
— the value of the Old Testament >\ill naturally claim par-
ticular consideration, not merely that we may consider the sub-
jects of revelation and of inspiration, but also that we may know
hoto to consider them.

ARTICLE XH.
Cbitical Notices.

1. — The Union Bible Dictionary, Prepared for the American
Sunday School Union^ and revised by the Committee of Pub-
licatian. Philadelphia : A. S. S. Union, 1837. pp. 648.

It would not be easy to specify any more hopeful symptom nt the
present day than the spirit of biblical research which has sprung up
along with the progress of Sunday School and Bible Class instruc-
tion. Neither teacher nor pupil now feels it to be enough merely
to master the letter of the sacred volume, or to become familiar
with the popular and common-place explanations of its text. The
Scriptures are beginning to be searched and their hidden riches to
be exposed and brought to the light. Every thing which can tend
to put the reader in more perfect possession of the exact mind of
the Spirit in his word is laid under tribute. Criticism, parallelism,
antiquities, travels, topography, eastern manners, customs, costumes,
idioms, scenery — in fine, the whole range of oriental illustration ia
now drawn upon in order to remove the obscurities of holy writ, and
make what is plain plainer. The wants which have been made to
be felt in consequence of this growing spirit of investigation have
already been met to a considerEdl>le oegree, and it is gratifying to
know that so many of the ablest pens in our country are devoted try
this service. That such is the case we have fresh evidence in the
very valuable litde volume here presented to the public by that in-
stitution which has done so much to foster this spirit, as well as to
minister to its gratification. The ^ Union Bible Dictionary' needs
only the passport of its own merits to secure it at once a high place
in the estunation of every student of the Bible.

This work, though comprisbg all the most valuable portions of

946 Critical Notices. [J^if «

the Dictiooaiy connected and improved by the editorial labors of
the Rev. Dr. Alexander, has still received such essential additions
and modifications as to render it in fact a strictly original work ; one
in which a leading design has been throughout to a&pt it most fully
to the present improved state of biblical science. In connection
with this, the object has been to make it so to correspond in
principle, character, and uses with the other publications of the So-
ciety, that the whole shall form together a kind of complete Biblical
Cyclopaedia.

From a thorough examination of the entire volume we feel pre-
pared to say that it is a most successful attempt to supply the vanous
desiderata in all former works of the same kind, nor could we easily
point out a volume of the same compass which embodies a larger
amount of valuable information selected with more judgment or di-
gested in better order. Far from being a mere dictionary of proper
names adapted to the biography or geography of the Bible, it con-
tains a condensed, but extremely satisfactory, summary of explana-
tions upon all the leading terms and subjects which naturally excite
inquiry in the mind of an attentive reader of the Scriptures.

The prominent excellencies which have struck us in the perusal
of the * Union Dictionary' are (1) The judgment, tact, and discrimi-
nation displayed in the matter brought toother under the different
articles, and the neat simplicity with which it is expressed. On an
inspection of the whole, the epithet judicious would perhaps best
convey the impression produced upon the mind of the intelligent
reader. Nothing is wanting, nothing superfluous ; just that is said,
for the most part, under every head, which it was important should
be said, and nothing more. And while the most rigid accuracy of
definition has evidently been studied in every page, an equally anx-
ious and successful efibrt is visible to clothe the whole in a style of
perspicuity that shall adapt it to the comprehension of every grade
of intellect (2) The air of freshness and of manifest authenticity
which is imparted to the illustrations drawn from the journals of
missionaries and travellers to the East In this department while
nearly every thing is neio, it is yet so pertinent^ that it is not easy to
describe the interest and relish with which it is pursued. (3) The
amount of pictorial illustration and its peculiarly axUkentic character.
The work abounds with plates handsomely executed and evidently
drawn from the very best sources. In contemplating them the mind
feels an inward assurance that they are not mere &ncy sketches,
but the most faithful representations which could be obtamed. It is
evident that great pains and great expense have been incurred in
this department, but both have been well laid out — ^It would be easy
to specify other points of excellence which characterize this volume,
but we conclude our very earnest recommendation of it by advert-
ing to its freedom from sectarian peculiarities and the great care

1838.] Works of Henry Hallam. 847

and accuracy with which it has heen hrought out. The services of
of the most distinguished bihlical scholars in the country, the com-
mittee say, have been employed in a general revision of it, while
many of its most important articles have been subjected to a critical
examination in other quarters. At the low price of 75 cts. per copy
an extensive sale alone can repay the labor and cost bestowed upon
it, and that it is abundantly entitled to such a circulation, we have no
hesitation in affirming.

2. — Works of Henby Hallam.

IrUroduetian to the Literature ofEuropeyin the Fifteenth^ Sixteenth
and Seventeenth centuries, ny Henry Hallam^ F. R, A. jS., CoT"
responding member of the Academy of Moral and Political Scten*
ces in the French Institute. London : John Murray, 1837. Vol.
I. pp. 659.

View of the State of Europe during the Middle Ages, hy Henry
Haltam. From the sixth London Edition^ complete in one i>oU
vme. New York : Harper & Brothers, 18^. pp. 568.

Mr. Hallam has been Ions and favorably known as a writer on
both sides of the Atlantic. His view of the State of Europe during
the Middle Ages has been published in six editions in England ana
two in this country. His Constitutional History of England from the
accession of Henry VII. to the death of George 11., in some respects
a continuadon of the History of the Middle Ages, has been issued in
three English editions and in one or two American. We do not
know, that Mr. H. has published any other works, except papers for

C nodical publications, etc. He is a member of the committee of
>Td Brougham^s Society for the DifRision of Useful Knowledge,
and accords, we suppose, with that distinguished man in politics.

Of the Literary Introduction the author says : " Some departments
of literature are passed over, or partially touched. Among the form-
er are books relating to particular arts, as agriculture or painting,
or subjects of merely local mterest, as those of English laws; among
the latter is the great and extensive portion of every library, the his-
torical. Unless where history has been written with peculiar beauty
of language, or philosophical spirit, I have generally omitted all men-
tion of it^' The principal authorities that the author mentions are
the Bibliotheca Universalis, and the Pandectae Universales of Con-
rad Gesner ; the Bibliotheca Selecta of Possevin ; Fabricius^s edi-
tion of the Polyhistor of Morhof ; the Origine Progresso e State at*
tuale d'ogni Litteratura of Andres, a Spanish Jesuit, characterized
as an extraordinary performance ; the Historv of Literature, a plan
undertaken in Germany, (but a small part of which has been com-
pleted), under the general direction of Eichhom, — in which Bou-

Stt Critical Notices. [Jan.

terwek had the department of poetry and polite letters, Sprengel of
anatomy and medicine, KHstner of the matnematical sciences, fiuhle
of speculative philosophy, and Heeren of classical philolosy ; Eich-
horn's History of Literature in six volumes ; the works or Tlrabos-
chi, Comiani and Gingu^n^, on Italian literature; Warton's History
of English Poetry ; tl^ philosophical works of Brucker and Tenne*
mann ; the French works of Montucla, Portal, Bayle, Niceron, and
the Biographic Universelle ; Chalmerses English Biographical Dic-
tionary, etc.

The first chapter of the work is on the general state of literature
In the Middle Ages to the end of the 14th century. The last of the
ancients, and one who forms a link between the classical period of
literature and that of the Middle Ages, in which he was a favorite
•author, was Boethius, a man of fine genius, whose Consolation of
Philosophy if as written in prison, shortly before his death. Thence-
forward the downfall of learning and eloquence was inconceivably
rapid. A state of general ignorance lasted about five centuries. A
slender but living stream, however, kept flowing on in the worst
times. Guizot and Hallam agree in the opinion that the seventh
century is the nadir of the human mind in Europe. Its movement
in advance began in the 8th century, with Charlemagne. England
soon furnished names of considerable importance in Theodore, Bede,
and Alcuin. Cathedral and conventual schools were created or re-
stored by Charlemagne, which produced happy fruits under his suc-
cessors. It is the most striking circumstance in the literary annals
of the Middle Ages, that they are more deficient in native genius
than in acquired ability. There was a tameness, a mediocrity, a
servile habit of copying from others. Only two extraordinary men
■stand out from the crowd in literature and philosophy — Scotus Eri-
gena and Gerbert. At the beginning of the 12th century, we enter
on a new division in the literary history of Europe. The most im-
portant circumstances which tended to arouse Europe from her
lethargy were the institutions of universities, and the methods pur«
sued in them ; the cultivation of the modem languages, followed by
the multiplication of books, and the extension of the art of writing ;
the investigation of die Roman law ; and the return to the study of
the Latin language in its purity. Collegiate foundations in universities
seem to have been derived mm the Saracens. At the year 1400,
we find a national literature subsisting in seven European languages,
three spoken in the Spanish peninsula, the French, the Italiem, the
German, and the English. The 14th century was not in the
slightest decree superior to the preceding age in respect to classical
:studieS. The first real restorer of polite letters was Petrarch.

Mr. Hallam, in his second chapter, treats of the literature of Eu<
rope from 1400 to 1440< The latter of these periods is nearly coin-
cident with the complete development of an ardent thirst for classi-

1838.] Works of Henry HaUam. M9

cal, especially Ghrecian, literature in Italy, as the year 1400 was
with its first manifestation. There are vestiges much earlier than
1400 of the study of Greek literature. But its decided revival can-
not be placed before 1395, when Chrysoloras established himself at
Florence as public teacher of Greek. He had some eminent disci-
ples. The principal Italian cities became more wealthy af\er 1350.
Books were cheaper than in other parts of Europe. In Milan, about
1300, there were fifty persons wh6 lived by copying them. At Bo*
l(^na also, it was a regular occupation at fixed prices. Albertus
Magnus, whose collected works were published at Lyons, in 1651,
in twenty-one folio volumes, may pass for the most fertile writer in
the world. Upon the three columns,— <;hivalry, gallantry, and reli-

f ion,— says Hallam, repose the fictions of the middle ages. In the
rst pait of the 15th century, we find three distinct currents of reli-
gious opinion, the high pretensions of the Roman church to a sort of
moral, as well as meological infallibility, and to a paramount au-
thority even in temporal afiairs ; secoud, the councils of Constance
and Basle and the contentions of the Gallican and German churches
asainst the encroachments of the holy see, had raised up a strong
adverse party ; third, the avowed heretics, such as the disciples of
Wiclif and Huss. Thomas k Kempis's De Imitatione Christi is said
to have gone through 1800 editions, and to have been read, proba-
bly, more than any work after the Scriptures.

The third chapter embraces the literature of Europe from 1440
to 1500. About 1450, Laurentius Valla gives us the earliest speci-
mens of explanations of the New Testament founded on the ori(p-
nal languages of Scripture. The capture of Constantinople, m
1453, drove a few learned Greeks to hospitable Italy. About the
end of the 14th century, impressions were taken from engraved
blocks of wood, sometimes for playing cards, which came into use
not long before that time ; sometimes for rude cuts of saints.
Gradually entire pages were impressed in this manner, and thus be-
gan what are called block-books, printed in fixed characters, but
never exceeding a very few leaves. The earliest book printed from
the movable types of Gutenberg is generally believed to be the
Latin Bible, commonly called the Mazarin Bible. This appears to
have been executed in 1455. An almanac for 1457 has been de-
tected. From 1470 to 1480, 1297 books were printed in Italy, of
which 234 are editions of ancient classics. The first Hebrew book,
Jarchi^s Commentary on the Pentateuch, was printed in Italy in 1475.
The whole Hebrew Bible was printed in Soncino in 1488. Several
distinguished men now arose such as PoUtian, Picus of Mirandola,
Reuchlin and Lionardo da Vinci. Erasmus and Budaeus were now
devoting incessant labor to the acquisition of the Greek langua^.
Erasmus's Adages, printed at Basle in 1500, was doubtless the chief
prose work of the century beyond the limits of Italy. It is certain
Vol. XI. No. 29. 32

250 Critical Notices. [Jan.

that much more than ten thousand editions of booka or pamphlet3
were printed from 1470 to 1500. More than half of the number
appeared in Italy. The price of books was diminished by four fifths
after the invention of printing.

The fourth chapter treats of the literature of Europe from 1500
to 1520. Leo X. became pope in 1513. He began by plac'mgmen
of letters in the most honorable stations of his court There were
two, Bembo and Sadolet, who had by common consent reached a
consummate elegance of style. The personal taste of Leu was al-
most entirely directed towards poetry and the beauties of style. We
owe to him the publication of the first five books of the Annals of
Tacitus. In 1514, above 100 professors received salaries in the
Roman university or gymnasium. Erasmus difiuses a lustre over
his age, which no other name among the learned supplies. His
Greek Testament was published in 1516. More's Utopia was the
onh' work of genius furnished by England in this age.

m treating of the Reformation, Mr. Hallam, as it seems to us,
does great injustice to Luther : ^^ The doctrines of Luther,'^ he re-
marks, ^^ taken altogether, are not more rational, that is, more con-
formable to what men, a priori, would expect to find in religion,
than those of the church of Rome ; nor did he ever pretend that
they were so. As to the privilege of free inquiry, it was of course
exercised by those who deserted their ancient altars, but certainly
not upon any latitudinarian theory of a right to judge amiss. Nor
again, is there any foundation for imeigining that Luther was con-
cerned for the interests of literature. None had he himself, save
theological ; nor are there, as I apprehend, many allusions to pro-
fane studies, or any proof of his regard to them, in all his works.
On the contrary, it is probable that both the principles of this great
founder of the Reformation, and the natural tendency of so intense
an application to theological controversy, checked for a time the
progress of philological and philosophical literature onthis side the
Alps." Again : "In the history of the Reformation, Luther is in-
compambly the greatest name. We see him, in the skilful compo-
sition of Robertson, the chief figure of a groupe of gownsmen, stand-
ing in contrast on the canvass with the crowned rivals of France and
Austria, and their attendant warriors, but blended in the unity of
that historic picture. This amazing influence on the revolutions of
his own age, and on the opinions of mankind, seems to have produ-
ced, as is not unnatural, an exaggerated notion of his intellectual
greatness. It is admitted on all sides, that he wrote his own lan-
guage with force and purity ; and he is reckoned one of its best
models. The hymns in use with the Lutheran church, many of
which are his own, possess a simple dignity and devoutness, never,
'probably, excelled in that class of poetry. But from the Latin
works of Luther few readers, I believe, will rise without disappoint-

1838.] Works of Henry Hallam. 'Zd I

ment. Their intemperance, their coarseness, their inele^nce, their
scurrility, their wild paradoxes, that menace the foundations of reli*
gious morality, are not compensated, so far at least as my slight ac-
quaintance with them extends, by much strength or acutenesp, and
still less by any impressive eloquence." " The total want of self-
restraint [in Luther], with the intoxicating effects of presumptuous-
ness, is sufficient to account for aberrations, which men of regular
minds construe into actual madness."

These extraordinary statements of Hallam are in keeping with re-
marks in his previous works. In his anxiety to avoid the partizan-
ship, as he describes it, of such men as Isaac Milne r, he falls, as it
seems to us, into tlie opposite extreme. Luther comes out from his
hands shorn of nearly all Jiis honors, an ignorant, furious, exacerbated
monk, who, if he could have had his way, would have involved the
world in a Protestant midnight. But Hal lam's statements seem to be
a little inconsistent with themselves. Luther wrote and spoke German
with great perfection. He composed numerous excellent hymns,
which is certainly a rare gift. He made a most excellent transla-
tion, as all acknowledge, of the Bible from the original Hebrew and
Greek into German — a translation which is to German literature
what our autfiorized translation is to English — ^a standard of the
tongue. Surely Luther must have had some philology, some com-
mon sense, some judgment, to have made a translation, with the
slight helps which he had, which created a language, and whose
merit is fully acknowledged by such writers as the Roman Catholic,
Frederic Schlegel. That Luther was an opponent of the study of
tiie Greek and Latin profane writers is news to us. Hallam appears
to receive all the splenetic remarks of Erasmus as indubitable proof.
Erasmus with all his learning and wit, had more sympathy, we fear,
with Horace than with Paul, and, in his latter davs, is one of the
last sources to which we should apply for correct mformation in re-
gard to Luther. In another passage, Hallam speaks of Luther as
one whose ^^ soul was penetrated with a fervent piety, and whose
integrity as well as purity of life are unquestioned." Again, he
writes of the total absence in him of self-restraint, which it would be
difficult to reconcile with fervent piety. We have been accustomed
to regard self-government as one of the most important parts of emi*
nent piety. Hallam gives a wholesale opinion of Luther's Latin
works, while he confesses that he has but a slight acquaintance with
them. Hundreds of passages in those works have impressive elo-
quence, if they have nothing else. '^ The best authorities," says
Hallam, *^ for the early history of the Reformation are Seckendorf
His^. Lutheranismi, and Sleidan Hist, de la Reformation, in Coura-
yer's French translation." Hallam makes no allusion to the great
work of J. G. Planck, incomparably the best work on the Protestant
aide, and very candid and impartial also. ^^ From Luther's Grermaa

252 Critical Notices. [Jan.

tmnslation, and from the Latin Vulgate, the English one of Tyn-
dale and Coverdale, published in 1535 or 1536, is avowedly taken."
On the contrary there is satisfactory proof that Tyndale translated
from the original Greek and Hebrew. How far Coverdale was ac-
quainted with Hebrew does not appear.

The fifth chapter of the work before us treats of the history of
ancient literature in Europe from 1520 to 1550. The labors of Sa-
dolet, Bembo, Erasmus, Budaeus, Camerarius, Gesner and others,
are passed briefly in review. The sixth chapter is occupied with
the theological literature which we have partly anticipated in our
notice of Luther. Of the Colloquies of Erasmus, which had an im-
portant bearing on the Reformation, 24,000 copies were sold in a
single year. Keference is here had to the Institutes of Calvin, to
the Loci Communes of Melancthon, the sermons of Latimer, etc.
" It may not" says the author, " be invidious to surmise, that Luther
and Melancthon serve little other purpose, at least in England, than
to give an occasional air of erudition to a theological paragraph, or
to supply its margin with a reference that few readers will verify."
We know not but that such is the case in England. We should in-
fer it from the ignorance of our author himself on the subject, but
the remark does not hold good on the continent nor in the United
States. The whole works of Luther are frequently imported into
this country. Large editions of his Commentary on the Galatians
have been published. A new and complete edition of Melancthon
is now coming out in Germany under the charge of Bietschneider.
Three editions of Calvin's Commentaries on the New Testament
have been sold in Grermany and this country within six or eight
years. Even in England, within two years past, an edition of Cal-
vin on Romans, and of Luther on Gralatians has been printed.

The seventh chapter contains the history of speculative, moral
and political philosophy, and of jurisprudence, in Europe, from 1520
to 1550. In speculative philosophy, we have Paracelsus, Agrippa,
and Jerome Cardan ; in political and moral philosophy, Calvin, Me-
lancthon, Erasmus, Thomas Eiyot, Cortegiano and especially Nico-
las MachiaveL Hallam's estimate of Machiavel is very able and dis-
criminating. MachiavePs Discourses may now be read with great ad-
vantage, especially as the course of civil society tends further towards
democracy. His works must, liowever, be read with large deduc-
tions. His History of Florence is enough to immortalize his name.

The eighth chapter contains the history of the literature of taste ;
and the nmth, of scientific and miscellaneous literature in Europe
from 1520 to 1550. Though these chapters contain, like other parts
of the volume, many interesting facts, and not a few profound ob-
servations, yet our limits preclude any further quotation or reference.

We will only remark, that the edition of the Middle Ages by the
Harpers, is brought out in excellent taste, and makes one very con-

1838.] The Chrutian Professor. 253

venient and portable volume. It contains what is not common in
these days, a very full index.

31 — The Christicai Professor, addressed in a series of Counsels and
Cautions to the Members of Christian Churches. By John
Angell James. New York : D. Appleton & Co. 18SHS. pp.

3sa.

The Rev. John Angell James of Birmingham has been too Ions
before the American public as the author of the l&mday Scho^
Teachers^ Guide, the Church Members^ Guide, the Family Monitor,
etc., and is too extensively known as the friend and correspondent of
several eminent clergymen and others in this country, to need com-
mendation to the favorable regards of our readers. The lively in-
terest which he has ever manifested in the advancement of religion
in the United States, as well as the influence of his writings in pro-
moting it, has taught us to regard him as one of ourselves. While
he is admired as a pious, judicious and instructive writer, he is also
hailed as a brother, throughout our churches, and each new produc-
tion from his pen is received by many with the confidence and ar-
dor of a confirmed and intense christian affection. The publication
of the " Christian Professor ^"^ is happily adapted to widen the sphere
of this affectionate regard for the author and his works.

The substance of this ^^ series of Counsels and Cautions^'* as the
author states in his preface, was delivered in a course of sermons
addressed to the chuich of which he is pastor. This book is design-
ed as a sequel to the '^ Church Members'* Guide,^'* and treats of me
practical rather than the private, experimental and doctrinal parts of
religion ; though these are distinctly exhibited and insisted on, as
essential, not only to true piety, but to the acceptable profession of
it Yet the design of the author is to ^^ contemplate the believer
rather as a professor, than a Christian, or at least rather as a Christ-
ian in relation to the church and to the world, than in his individual
caracity, or in his retirements/^

The work is divided into nineteen chapters, embracing the follow-
ing topics :

What the christian profession imports. — ^The obligation and design
of the christian profession. — ^The dangera of self-deceptbn. — ^The
young professor. — ^An attempt to compare the present generation of
profe^rs with others that have preceded them. — ^The necessity and
importance of professors not being satisfied with low degrees of piety,
and of their seeking to attain to eminence. — ^The duty of professora
to avoid the appearance of evil. — On conformity to the world. — Chi
the conduct or professors in reference to politics. — On brotherly love.
— ^The influence of professors. — Conduct of professora towards un-
converted relatives. — ^The unmarried professor. — ^The professor in

254 Critical Notices, [Jaw.

prosperity. — ^The professor in adversity. — The conduct of professors
away from home. — The backsliding professor. — On the necessity
of the Holy S[)irit^s influence to sustam the christian professor. — ^The
dying protessor.

We have read most of these chapters with great satisfaction, and
cordially recommend the book to American readers. Though the
author had in his eye the professors of Christianity in another nation,
and wrote for their benefit especially, his Counsels and Caudons
and even his descriptions of the present generation of professors, are
equally applicable to those of our own country. He does honor to
several of our own authors by quoting them in confirmation or Illus-
tration of the sentiments he inculcates. Among these are an admi-
rable ^^ address to persons on their joining the church contained in
a manual used in one of the Presbyterian churches in America," the
excellent " advice" ffiven by Edwards " to a young lady who had
just commenced the life of faith," and portions of a sermon by the
Rev. Albert Barnes of Philadelphia on " the rule of Christianity in re-
gard to conformity to the world," which has been republished ia
England.

The sentiments of this little volume are evangelical. Some pas-
sages of it are eloquent, and highly attractive.

4. — Outlines of a history of the Court of Rome and of the Temporal
Poiper of the Popes. Translated from the French. Phila-
delphia : Joseph Whetham, 1837. pp. 328.

This book is executed in a manner which is creditable to the pub-
lisher. In its bearings upon the Catholic controversy in this country
both ecclesiastical and political, it is a timely and important publica-
tion. It is divided into thirteen chapters, the running titles of which
are, " The origin of the temporal power of the popes." — ^^ Enter-
prises of the popes of the ninth century." — ^" The tenth century." —
*' Enterprises of the popes of the eleventh century." — ^*' Quarrels
between the popes and the sovereigns of the twelfth century." —
" The power of the popes of the thirteenth centunr." — ^" The four-
teenth century." — " The fifteenth century." — ^ Policy of the popes
of the sixteenth century." — ^''The attempts of the popes of the
seventeenth century." — ^"The eighteenth century." — ^'^ Kecapitula-
tion." — ^*' The conduct of the coiut of Rome since the year 1800."

The first French edition of the work was published in 1810. The
last chapter, (on the conduct of the court of^ Rome since 1800,) was
not added until the fourth edition, which was published in 1818.
To this also was appended a " Chronological Table of the popes"
from St. Peter in the first centurvr, which is continued, in the Ameri-
can edition, to the election of Gregory XVI., in 1831. Thb table
throws some light upon several of the details of the work, and is a
valuable appenoage.

1838.] History of the Court of Rome. 35&

This work, though published anonymously, is asserted to be th&
production of M. munou. M. Dupin, recently a member of the
French ministry, calls it a historical work of the first order, and
gives it a place in his " Bibliotheque Choisie des Uures de droit
qu'il est le plus utile d'acquerir et de connaitre.*^

We extract the following from the able and interesting preface to*
the edition now before us.

^^ The author composed this work, (which he modestly calls an
essay,) under peculiar advantages. The Archives of the Vatican^
which had been removed to Paris, were in his custody, at the time,
by order of the government, (says M. Dupin,) and subject to his in-
spection. He appears to have been elaborate in research and judi-
cious in the selection of his authorities. He is clear and methodical
in the arrangement of facts, philosophical and profound in his views
and spirited in his composition. His purpose in composing it was
to prove that the temporal power of the Roman pontins originated
in fraud and usurpation ; that its influence upon their pastoral minis-
try has been to mar and degrade it ; tliat its continuance is dangerous
to the peace and liberties of Europe ; and that its constant influence
and effects are to retard the advancement of civilization and know-
led^. Among the documents upon which he relies are many
which, he says, had never before been published.

" In treating the subject, M. Daunou very naturally gives promi-
nence to those passages in the history of the court of Kome which
are particularly connected with the aiiairs of his own country. The
liberties of the Gallican church and the quarrels which have oc-
curred between the kings of France and the Roman pontiffs, on
account of those liberties, are set forth with considerable detail.^'

It should be remarked, however, that the author has, in some in-
stances, traced with minuteness the policy and conduct of the court
of Rome towards other countries, and the effects of that policy.

It adds ereatly to the value of this work that the author is de-
cidedly a Hom&n Catholic, and that, while he deprecates the tempo-
ral power of the popes, he not only admits but positively asserts
their supremacy in all things purely spiritual, and the claims of the
Roman Catholic church to determine authoritatively all matters of
faith. In the latter particular he differs from Gibbon in his ^^ His-
tory of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,'^ and from Hallam,
in his *' View of the State of Europe during the Middle Ages.^^ Dif-
fering from the above authors, as M. Daunou does, in regard to the
spiritual supremacy of the Roman pontiffs, his agreement with them
in other matters or fact and opinion may be deemed a mutual con-
firmation, and a disagreement between them, a reason for further
investi^tion.

On Uie whole, this book comes to us with high authority and we
regard it as well adapted to the instruction of American readers. It

S56 Critical Notices. [Jan.

teaches lessons of wisdom in regard to the aasamptions of ecclesias-
tical power in matters of faith, which will not fail to he appreciated
by the members of the protestant churches in this country, and our
smtesmen and those who aspire to become such may here obtain
enlightened and definite views of that court which was the founder^
and has been the principal teacher of European diplomacy.

It is also well remarked by the American editor, that '' the senti-
ments of the author, upon the important topics of this book, are not
unworthy of the attention of the Roman Catholic citizens of the
United States.

'^ For a long period these topics have attracted the attention of
the politicians as well as the clergy of France. Several works have
been published in that country, relative to the temporal power of the
popes, among which a small volume entitled *' Origine, progres, et
limites de la puissance des popes,^' etc. (Paris 1^1) which pos-
sesses considerable merit. The object of it is the same as that of
this. Its author remarks in his preface that his work ^ may be use-
ful not only to ecclesiastics, who ought to blush at their need of in-
struction in that matter, but also to those public men, who feel the
necessity of maintaining the Catholic religion, and at the same time
making it consistent with our liberties.^ The liberal party in France,
(to which both these authors belong,) insist upon the restoration of
the Catholic religion to the simplicity and moderation of the ancient
church, as a measure which is indispensable to the civil and reli-
ffious liberties of that country. This simplicity has been marred,
they say, by the false decretals, the decree of Gracian, the decretals
of the popes, etc. and the church (than which as it was in the early
ages no society could be more free) has, they affirm, become an
•engine of intolerance and even of despotism. This party is opposed
by another, which contends for the system as it is, notwithstanding
the admitted spuriousness of the decretals, upon which the most ol^
jectionable parts of the system are founded. Their disputes have
ffiven origin to many treatises of great learning and ability, upon
tiie subject of the early discipline of the church— of the liberties of
the Grallican church — of the pragmatics-^-of the concordats, etc. etc.
It is not an absurd supposition, that causes which, in times piast, have
-a^cted injuriously the public and individual interests of the people
•of France may, in times future, affect in like manner the citizens of
other countries. On no other supposition can we, in any case, with
propriety invoke history, as a guide in present emergencies. That
the doctrines of this book, and the expedients proposed in it, are
still accredited and approved by Catholic Frenchmen, distinguished
for learning and talents, as well as by the popular voice of that
country, is sufficiently shown by the testimony of M. Dupin, to the
merits of this book and by the number of editions through which it
lias passed. It is impossible, that the Roman Catholic laity of the

1838.] Worki of Joieph AidUcn. S57

United States, should condemn, what the intelligence and experience
of the best minds in France decidedly approve, or that they should
deem that, to be trivial, which, su<^h men as the advocate general
T\gdon, M. Dupin, M. Daunou and many others not less distinguished,
have considered of the utmost importance to the social and political
interests of their country."

6. — The Elements of Political Economy* Abridged for the use of
Academies, ny Francis Waylandy B, D. President ofBrovm
University^ and Professor of Intellectual and Moral PhiloS'
ophy, Boston : Gould, Kendall dc Lincoln, 1837. pp. 254.

Our opinion of the original work of Dr. Wayland, from which the
above has been abridged, was expressed in a former No. of the Re-
pository, Vol. X. p. S39 seq. Tlie author has now accomplished
what we then suggested as highly desirable. He has so condensed
and abridged bis original work as to furnish an admirable text book
for the use of academies and higher seminaries. We are glad to
see this Abridgement before the public, and cordially recommend it

6.-— Prtttctpfe* of Interpreting the Prophecies; briefly {Uusirated
and applted. With JNoies. By Henry Jones. New York
and Andover : Gould & Newman, 1637. pp. 150.

The principles formally stated in this book are twenty four. In
excogitating and arran^ng these principles the author seems to have
confined himself principsilly to the study of the English Bible with*
out recourse to the more extended investigations of others. The
work is original and appears to have been the result of much study.
Some of the principles here illustrated are not as weU guarded as
they might have been by more extensive learning, and some of them,
we think, are not fully sustained. Yet the author has succeeded in
stating with clearness some important facts, as ^^ First piinciples of
the oracles of God," which, as he remarks in his Introduction, " have
heretofore been, and are still too much overlooked in the study of the
prophecies." These principles are " easy to be understood and ap-
plied even by the unlearned," and may be safely submitted to every
class of readers.

7. — The Works of Joseph Addison^ complete in Three Volumes,
Embracing the whole of the " Spectalor^'* etc. New York :
Harper and Brotheis, 1837. pp. 456, 459, 535.

The Works of Addison have acquired a reputation which needs
not the aid of the periodical press to sustain it. They are among
the richest treasures of English literature, and will not cease to be
admired so long as the elegancies of the English language shall be

Vol. XI. No. 29. 33

258 Critical No(iee$. [Jam.

cultivated. The publishers of these works have done honor to the
literary taste and refinement of our country by presuming on the
sale of a large edition of these volumes. Thev have also done honor to
themselves by the convenient and elegant form hi which they have
prepared and executed the work. Their own '* Advertisement'*
prefixed to the first volume, which we subjoin, expresses ail that we
need to say in commendins this edition to our readers, viz :

'^ In presenting to the American public this new edition of the
writings of Joseph Addison, the publishers hold it altogether super-
fiuous and unnecessary to say any thing in commendation of the
works themselves, or make any reference to the established and in-
creasing celebrity of the author. That celebrity has been delibe-
rately conferred by a succession of generations, and the name of Ad-
dison is permanently enrolled among the brightest that adorn the
Augustan age of English literature. A few words, however, of
comment upon the peculiar advantages of this edition may be per-
mitted, it is hoped, if on no other ground, at least as showing the
anxiety of the publishers to provide the community with the best
which they can obtain, and the most suited to gratify the wants and
wishes of every reader.

The superiority of this edition over any heretofore published in
this country, or, indeed in England, consists in its convenience of
form, its k>w price, its accuracy, its neatness of mechanical execu-
tion, and above all, its completeness. It comprises not only all the
essays, letters, poems, criticisms, tales, descriptions and dramatic works
of Addison, hut also the whole of the Spectator ; this last being a new
and very useful arrangement, inasmuch as many of the finest essays^
narratives and characters in that admirable series were contributed
jointly by Addison and others. The delightful character of Sir Rog-
er de Coverley, for instance, was frequently taken up by Steele,
Budgell, and several others of the contributors who were quite as of\en
employed in the beautiful papers relating to " the club" as was Ad-
dison himself. It is evident that, by separating those of the latter from
the others, as has been done in former editions of his works, the
continuity of the story is destroyed and the pleasure of the reader
materially diminished. In this point of view alone the edition now
offered must be considered vastly preferable.

Care has been taken, nevertheless, to designate not only the pa-
pers contributed by Addison, but also those furnished by each of
the other writers ; and in all other respects the edition of the Spec-
tator comprised within these volumes is as complete and perfect as
any ever published. The publishers have only to add the expres-
sion of their hope, that the favor of the public to this undertaking
may be such as shall encourage them to the production of other
English classics in a corresponding style of excellence, literary and
mechanical."

1888.] Religious Dissensions, 259

8. — T%e Young Disciple; or^ A Memoir of Anzonetta R. Peters.
By Rev. John A. Chtrk^ Rector Sf St, Andrev^s Churchy
PhUadOpMa. Author of'*' The Pastor's Testimony,^' ''Walk
about Zion^^ " Gathered PragmentSy'* etc, Philadelphia :
William Marshall & Co. 1837. pp. 328.

The subject of this Memoir departed this life in the city of New
York in the autumn of 1833, aged about eighteen years. She was
a member of the Episcopal church, and her piety, to use the lan-
guage of her biographer, " was of the brightest and holiest stamp."
She was a grand-daughter of the Rev. Christopher Godfrey Peters,
pastor of the Moravian church in the city of New York, who died
m 1797, and cousin of Caroline Elizabeth Smelt, the history of whose
wonderful conversion and dying testimony has done much to exalt
the riches of free grace and win souls to Christ, — has been exten-
sively read in this country, has passed through several editions in
England, has been translated into the German, and is exerting its
silent but elective influence in many countries. The memoir of
Miss Peters is less striking and wonderful, but the spirit which per-
vades it is equally attractive, and its narrative equally suited to iu*
struct and benefit the reader. It is well written and worthy of ex*
tensive circulation.

9. — Religious Dissensions : Their Cause and Cure, A Prize Es'
say. By Pharcellus Churchy Author of " Philosophy of B^
nevolence,'* New York : Gould & Newman. Amherst : J.
S. dc C. A<Jams. Boston : Crocker & Brewster, Gould, Ken-
dall & Lincoln. Hartford : Canfield & Robbins. Rochester :
H. Stanwood & Co. 1838. pp. 400.

The manner in which this work has been brought before the pub-
lic furnishes presumptive evidence of its substantial excellence. A
premium of #200 was ofiered for the best Tract or Treatise on Dis-
sensions in the churches. From twenty-seven manuscripts, several
of which, the committee say, were written with much ability and in
an excellent spirit, they selected this for the premium.

On the announcement of this award we were happy to learn that
it had fallen to the name of the Rev. Pharcellus Church. We have
known this author only through his previous work entitled ** The
Philosophy of Benevolence,'* which we regard as one of the best books
which has been issued from the American press. A distinguished
clergyman, and a stranger to the author remarked to us, soon after
its publication, that it was one of the few books which, having begun,
he felt impelled to read entirely through. We have not yet liad
time to follow this example in our perusal of the '' Prize Essay,''
but from the portions which we have read, our impression is tfiat
the author has fully equalled himself, in his former work. We in-

960 Critical Notices. [Jah.

tend to read it through, and Providence permittiiig, to ezpresB our
views more at large on the important and delicate subjects of which
it treats in a future Number of the Repository. — In the mean time
we commend this interesting and very seasonable publication to the
diligent and devout use of the ministers and members of our
churches of different names, whom the Saviour prays and commands
to be ONE.

10. — A New T^anslalion of the Hehreio Prophets, arranged in
chronological order. By George R. Noyes. Vol, III., con'
taxfdng Ezekiel, Daniel, Haggai, Zechariah, Jonah and Mai-
achi. Boston : James Munroe & Co. 1837. pp. 2d4.

Mr. Noyes has now accomplished a translation of all the prophet-
ical books of the Scriptures. He has persevered with most praise-
worthy dili^nce, though, we regret to say, that but limited support
has been yielded to his works. Much benefit in the way of under-
standing some of the most difficult portions of the Scriptures can be
derived by all classes of readers in an examination of these transla-
tions. They embody some of the results of the most recent
investigations which have been made in Germany in the Hebrew
Scriptures. The notes are very brief. We are sorry that some
things are to be found in them which show that Mr. Noyes has
a very low opinion of the inspiration of the Bible, and which will
preclude a large class of readers from obtaining much instruction
from what is really valuable. Read the following : " Respecting
the comparative merits of Ezekiel as a writer, there has been a con-
siderable diversity of opinion, as may be seen in the remarks of
bishop Lowth upon this prophet, in his Lectures on Hebrew Poetry,
and the note of Michaelis. To me the judgment of Michaelis ap-
pears in this instance to be more correct than that of Lowth. Un-
doubtedly there are to be found in Ezekiel some striking passages,
such as the vision of the dry bones, some ^at thoughts, such as that
in 36: 26, and many bold images. But m general he wearies the
reader by endless amplification and frequent repetition, and some-
times disgusts by his minuteness of detail in the delineation of gross
images. One illustration, which Isaiah has despatched in a smgle
▼eise, or a single expression. Is. 1: 21, Ezekiel has spun out into
whole chapters, so as to lead us to wonder at the state of society,
when such things would not be offensive to the taste of a writer of
genius and his contemporary readers. See ch. xvi. and xxiii. His
visions and allegories sometimes dazzle and confound rather than
impress and instruct us, though it may be said that his contempora-
ries may have attached a meaning to them, where we cannot. Yet
he was himself so sensible of the obscurity of some of his emblems
and alleffories, that he gives a verbal explanation of them. Some of
bis embfems are forced and unnatural^ and there occurs occasionally

1838.] A Alother's Reque$t. 961

sometbin^ ludicrous in their want of appropriateness, as when he
takes an iron pan, and lays siege to it, as the emblem of enemies
besieging the wall oi a city. His language is generally prosaic,
prolix, and without strength. There may appear to some riders a
want of reverence in thus speaking of the style of the prophet ; but
since^the time of bishop Lowth the style of the sacred writers has
been regarded as their own, and made the subject of criticism, and
in my opinion great injury is done to the just claims of the sacred
writers by extravagant and indiscriminate eulogy.'^ Such things re-
quire no comment Far distant be the time when our theologians
shall, learn to think and write so irreverently of men who spcdce as
they were moved by the Holy Ghost ! Mr. Noyes's views of the
prophecies of Ae Old Testament in relation to the Messiah accord
with those held by many in Germany, but which we hope will never
have currency among us.

10. — The Family Preacher; or^ Domestic Duties illustrated and
enforced in Eight Discourses. By Rev, Rufus William
Bailey^ of South Carolina. New York : John S. Taylor,
1837. pp. 158.

The subjects discussed in this volume are the ^^ duties of hus-
bands,-—of wives, — of females,— of parents, — of children, — of mas-
ters,-—of servants.^' The sermons are short, and written in a finished
and flowing style, which is at the same time simple and intelligible.
They are of a highly practical character and well adapted to family
roacUng.

11. — A Mother'* s Request, Answered in Letters of a Father to his
Daughters. Philadelphia : Joseph Whetham, 1837. pp. 264.

This little volume is neatly finished in all respects, and is credita-
ble both to the author and the publisher. Though published anony-
mously, it is from the pen of the Rev. R. W. Bailey of South Caro-
lina, the author of the ^^ Family Preacher,^' which we have noticed
in a preceding paragraph. The preparation of these letters was the
result of one of those mysterious providences, of not unfrequent oc-
currence, by which the mother of a young and dependent family is
removed by death. This affliction in the present instance was
attended with circumstances of thrilliDg interest, and the " Mother^s
Request,^^ previous to her departure to a better world served to im-
press upon her surviving husband a still deeper sense of his parental
responsibilities. Thus urged by a sacred regard to the wishes of his
departed companion, on tide one hand, and by the tenderest sympa-
thies on the other, he has given expression to his parental solicitude
in a series of excellent counsels, contained in forty-three letters ta
his daughters. The topics appear to be judicbusly selected, and
the sentiments of the book are conceived in a subdued and chastened

262 Literary and MUctU. Intelligence. [J ah.

spirit, are ezpieased with elegance and neatnesB, and breathe the tone
of piety throughout It is worthy of an extensiYe circulation, and
cannot fail to be read with profit by the sons and daugbtm of
affliction.

ARTICLE XIII.
Select Literary and Miscellaneous Intelligence.

UNITED STATES.

We have received the first sheets of Prof. Bushes Exposition of
the books of Joshua and Judges. His main object is to afibrd facili*
ties for the correct understanding of the sacred text — ^to aid the stu-
dent of the Bible to ascertain with exactness the genuine sense of
the original. Though the general aspect of the bc^k is critical, yet
practical remarks have been inserted to such an extent as to adapt
it happily to popular use. One of the excellencies of the author's
commentaries on the Scriptures is that he j^pples with the really
difficult passages, instead of adroitly passmg them over, as some
commentators do, with a cursory practical remark. We are dad
to learn, that it is Prof Bush's purpose to go over all the histoncal
books of the Old Testament on the same plan. The book of Grene*
sis is already in a considerable state of forwardness.

The first part of Prof Nordheimer's Critical Grammar of the
Hebrew Language has come to hand. It is printed at New Haven
by B. L. Hamlen, and apparently with great accuracy. The paper
is good and the whole appearance is neat and prepossessing. The
work will be completed in two volumes, of about 900 pages each.
The first volume, (the first part of which of 120 pages is now pub-
lished,) will contain the whole of the Granunar as &r as the Syntax ;
the second will contain the Syntax, and a grammatical analysis of
select portions of the Scriptures, of progressive difficulty, including
those portions usually read in the principal institutions of this coun-
try. The whole will be published in the course of the present year.
Tlie price of the two volumes will probably be about six dollars.

A small volume has just been published by Gould 6c Newman,
entitled, '^ Thoughts on a New Order of Missionaries.*' We have
not read the volume, and cannot speak of its merits. It does not
propose to interfere at all, as we understand, with existing missionary
organizaficHis, but advocates the adoption of means for sending out
pious physicians into all portions of the heathen world. The sub-
ject is important, and we have no doubt die boc^ will attract attentioii.

1838.] Lkerary and MUcell. htelSgenee. 963

We have leoeived a short oommanlcation from a ^* Friend of
Truth and Justice,'* requestipff us to correct a remark which we
made in our introductory article in January, 1837, in relation to the
British Socie^" for Promoting Christian Knowledge. We there stated
that at the time when this Society was publishing the Bible in two
languages, the British and Foreign Bible Society were publishing it
in 150. Our correspondent suggests that the former society does
not, like the latter, hmit its operations to one department of efibrt
but that its labors embrace schools, missions, distribution of the Bi-
ble, and other books, translation of the Bible, lending libraries, and
the relief of temporal necessities. Our correspondent also suggests
that the former Society had accomplished a^reat amount of good
before the rise of the Bible Society in 1804. m 1711, the ChristiaB
Knowledge Society had given instruction to nearly 5000 children ;
in 1761, it had established upwards of 1400 schools, in which
were 40,000 children, in England and Wales, besides similar schools
in Scotland and Ireland, ami had in 1764, planted a number of
misskms, etc. We have only to say, in justification of ourselves, that
the facts in our article were taken from Mr. Choules^s Origin and
History of Missions, that taking all the labors of the Christian Knowl-
edge Society in view, at any one time, since the Bible Society was
formed, it has exhibited much less energy than the latter, and that
what energy it has possessed, has been apparently much augmented
by the establishment of the Bible Society. These were the positions
taken in our article, and we think the facts will warrant them, not-
withstanding the sugoestions of our correspondent

A new ecution of ProL Stuart^s Hebrew Chrestomathy and also of
his Grammar of the New Testament Dialect will be published dur*
ing the present year.

We observe that the Rev. Dr. Adams, president of the college oi
Qiarieston, S. C. has published a new work on Moral Philosophy.
We hope to be able to give it an extensive review hereafter.

Prof. Hitchcock of Amherst College has published De La Beche^s
excellent Manual of Gedogy, with euiditional notes and illustrations*

PERSIA.

We have just received the following items of informatioii from Mr*
Perkins of Ooroomiah. ^ You inquire respecting European travel-
lers, now in these regions. I know of but few. Monsieur Auchet Eloy^
a French botanist recently travelled through Persia and the adjacent
regions. He had gathered a large and very valuable collection of botan-
ical specimens, and had reached Constantinople on his return ; but in
that city of conflagrations, his lodgings took fire, and his collection
of phtnts and flowers — the fruits of almost endless tcHl-^were alt.
consumed in the flames. I think he will repeat his botanic excur*

964 Uteranf and MUceU. hieUigencs.

sioDs, in these regi<HiB9 as I believe it was his intentioQ to publish.
Mr. William Hamilton — a youns English gentleman, has recently
travelled in Asia Minor, and, I believe, to some extent, also, in
Mesopotamia. He is a very able young man, and it is under-
stood that he will publish the result of his travels. James Brant, Esq.,
His Britannic Majesty's consul at Erzroom, has travelled exten-
sively in Asia Minor, and an interesting article from his pen, on the
regions over which he has travelled, together with a map of the
same, recently appeared in a periodical magazine of the fioyal
Greographical Society, published at London. I was kindly enter-
tained by Mr. Brant, during my late visit at Erzroom, and he men-
tioned to me his intention of soon making a tour into KiCtrdistan, the
result of which he will doubtless be able to ^ve to Christendom im-
portant information, respecting regions, which have never yet been
visited by a European. The English embassy, in this country, are,
at present, doing little of a literary nature. Its members are too
fully occupied in political matters, to allow them the necessary time.
Mr. Mc Neill, the ambassador, is a man of very high literary stand-
ing. Many interesting and able articles, from him, have, within a
few years, appeared iu Blackwood's Magazine. All the articles on
Persia, that have been published in that work, are from his pen.
The lithographic press, which was formerly at Tabreez, is now at
Teheran, employed in publishing a periodical newspaper, under
the auspices of the king. This is the first newspaper ever published
in Persia — four numbers have been issued — and, though it is a small
thing in itself, it is a day-star of glory for the civil regeneration of
this country. It is edited by a Persian Meerza, who was once am-
bassador to England, — who speaks the English language — and is
ardently desirous to see the light and civilizaticm of Europe intro-
duced into Persia. And as this light roUs in, how important is it,
that the gospel should come with it, and eive it the right direction !
We have nothing new, respecting Mount Ararat On my kite jour-
ney to ErKroom, I again passed along its base ; and I never felt so
strong a desire to ascend it as in this instance. The earliness of the
season, however, forbade the attempt The snow extended down,
at that time, (May,) almost to its base. But I have no doubt that it
may be ascended, on the north-west side, which is by far the least
steep, with the aid of proper facilities and preparations, and at the
right season of the year. In August and September the snow covers
not more than one third of the mountain. The region west and
south-west of Ararat presents striking indications df having felt the
effects of former volcanic action. For a distance of mleen or
twenty miles the surface of the ground is almost entirely covered
with stones, each weighing from five to ten or fifleen pounds, which
give indubitable evidence of having been in a stale of partial fusion.^'

TBI

AMERICAN

BIBLICAL REPOSITORY.

Ho. XXX.

APRIL, 1888.

ARTICLE I.

»

Thc Evidences of the Genuineness of the Gospels, by
Andrews Norton. Vol. L Boston^ 1837.

Eeviewed by M. SliMut, Prof. Sko. Lit. in the Tbeol. Seminary, AndoTW.

The volume, which bears the title given above, is certainly
a production of no ordinary stamp, and is a phenomenon in our
literary hemisphere which ought to excite much interest. Our
country has hitherto been very sparing of contributions to the
stock of sacred literature ; at least of such as are the fruit of
long and intense study, and the result of a widely extended
knowledge of antiquities either sacred or profane. We have
so few men who can afford to bury themselves for a long time
in the closets of libraries, and so few libraries that have closets
well stocked with books ; wTtbal we are so intent upon the
practical business of life-— on making our fortunes, or building
up a mere temporary and popular fame, or grasping at office —
that we grow impatient under protracted years of effort in the
acquisition of individual knowledge, and seldom endeavour to
accomplish what the riper scholars of Europe are every day
labounng to accomplish. And what is very discouraging to the
few, who can surmount the usual obstacles, resist all tempta-
tions to acquire a mere short-lived celebrity, and consent to
plough and sow with the certain apprehension that they must

Vol. XL No. 30. 34

266 Genuineness of the Gospels. [Apbil

wait for the harvest until some future period which may Dot ar-
rive before it is too late for them to witness its gathering in —
what indeed has hitherto almost paralyzed every attempt among
us at long protracted and severe literary effort, is, that when
any thing of this nature has been executed, it has rarely if ever
met with such success as to encourage new adventurei's in the
same or the like undertakings. If a book does not either en-
tertain the mass of our public, or show them how to become
richer or more thrifty in their business, or is not indispensable
as a professional work, the publishers may regard themselves
as unusually fortunate, in case they get off without solid loss
from an edition of 750 or at most 1000 copies. This is true of
almost any thoroughly literary work which can be named.

It were easy to support these allegations by appeal to par-
ticular facts ; but the detail of them would be an ungrateful
labour, and lead me, moreover, quite away from the execution
of the more pleasant task which i have now undertaken to per-
form. If any reader is so sensitive to the honour of the litera-
ry character of those who dwell this side of the Atlantic, as to
look with suspicion on such statements as I have made, and to
call them in question, let him make trial at the of&ce of even
the most intelligent and liberal of our publishers, and see what
the result of his inquiries about the publication of a work of
deep and recondite literature will be. Nor can he justly blame
the publishers. How can they affi)rd to print what the Amer-
ican public will not patronize ? And how can they be respon-
sible for the pursuits and the taste of all their countrymen ?

Mr. Norton is one of the very few among us, who are pla-
ced in circumstances of literary ease and comfort. Not c-on-
strained to pursue the daily duties of an office, which he once
held in the University of Cambridge, in order to provide for
himself and his family, he seems to have relinquished them for
the sake of a higher object — ^to devote himself without reserve
to the pursuit of sacred literature in some of its most interesting
and important branches. The work before us is the fruit of the
leisure thus secured ; and surely it bears testimony that this lei-
sure-time has been very busily employed.

The author telb us, in his preface, that he began this work
in 1819, and that he was then ' so much in error respecting the
inquiries to which it would lead him, that he believed it might
be accomplished in six months.' Every tyro in literature who
afterwards makes any considerable advances, can at a later day

1838.] CtenuineneiM of the Oospeb, 967

sympathize with such a feeling as this. He remembers the
time, when he wondered that such men as have taken the lead
in sacred literature or theology, should have occupied so many
years in doing what seemed to him to be feasible in the course
of a few weeks, or at most of a few months. How often is the
diligent scholar reminded, that the mount of science is like that
of natural vision ; the higher you ascend, the wider the pros-
pect is extended. Even when we reach the summit, it is only
to see that the prospect is boundless in every direction.

Mr. Norton, it seems, has been busied some eighteen years
with his undertaking, instead of six months ; although this is
not to be understood of his first volume only which is now pub-
lished, hut also of two more which are yet to appear. The pub-
lic cannot complain of the author, by alleging in this case that
he is hasty in his performance, seeing that the ^^ nonum pre-
matur in annum" has been doubled in the present instance But
the book m question gives evidence enough that it has not been
lying idly by, during the greater part of these eighteen years.
The investigations which it developes could never have been
made without much time and severe labour.

It seems to have been the general persuasion of the English
and American public, since the publication of the great work of
Lardner on the Evidences of Christianity, and that of Paley,
that little or nothing more remained to be done, in regard to
the literary and archaeological part of this undertaking. Lard-
ner seemed to have exhausted all the store houses of ancient
Jewish, Heathen, or Christian testimonies to the existence and
genuineness of the New Testament books ; and Paley, who has
added little indeed to the archaeological part of this undertaking,
has thrown the whole substance into such a compact, tangiUe,
intelligible form, employed such skill and address in his reason-
ing, and so admirably adapted the whole to popular ends, at
least for the instruction of the greater part of the well-informed
community, that there did not seem to be any call for further
efhxt in regard to this part of Christian Apologetics. In addi-
tion to this it should also be remarked, that within the last half
century very few infidel works have appeared in the English
language, which had any claim to literary pretensions, or which
needed any refutation from a knowledge of antiquity. They
have been little else than a repetition of the stale criticisms and
ieers of Voltaire, La Mettrie, Paine, and a few others of the
like class ; and whatever show of argument has been exhibited,

268 Genuineness of the Oospeb. [April

it has been mostly of the a priori kind, either assuming that
the attributes of God are utterly inconsistent with the doctrines
and narratives of the Bible, or else that we are equally desti-
tute of evidence both in respect to the being and attributes of
God and the truth of the Scriptures.

After all the learning and ability, however, that Lardner and
Paley have shewn in England in relation to the subject before
us, or Schmidt, Kleuker, or Less have exhibited on the Conti-
nent of Europe, there has sprung up, within the last generation,
a new reason for further effort, such as Mr. Norton has made.
Novus sedArum incipit ordo ; but in a very different sense, no
doubt, from that which the poet meant to convey. Semler,
Eckermann, Eichhorn, Paulus, Gabler, Henke, and many others
of the like stamp, in Germany, have, in one way and another,
assailed the general and settled belief of the Christian church at
large, in respect to the genuineness and authenticity of the New
Testament Scriptures, from quarters that were unexpected, and
in a manner which for a while was perplexing and somewhat
disheartening to the most strenuous defenders of the older and
long established sentiments of Christians in general.

Neology in Germany has indeed liad, for a while, apparently
a prosperous run and propitious gales. The time was, and for
more than one decemium too, when there was not more than
one solitary magazine in all Germany, of any great literary pre-
tensions, which maintained both the genuineness and the authen-
ticity of the sacred books. This was the highly respectable
Magazin of Storr, Flatt, and others, at Tiibingen. Now and
then a solitary voice was heard, in defence of the Old Testa-
ment or of the New, like that of Jahn, or in some respects of
Hug, and of a few writers of smaller treatises. How greatly
are those times changed ! A predominant party in literature
are plainly rising up, at present, who believe and maintain for
substance the long established doctrines of the Christian church-
es in relation to these topics. Another day, I iully believe a bet-
ter one, is dawning once more on the churches of the Conti-
nent.

Widely difiused as German literature is beginning to be in
this country and in England, it is unwise, indeed it is impossi-
ble, for us to remain idle spectators of the great contest which
has been and still is going on. If those who believe in and wish
to defend either the genuineness, or the authenticity, or botli,
of the Old Testament and the New, choose to slumber on their

1838.] Genuineness of the Oospels. 269

post, and let neological views have their course without any ef-
fort to eheck or regulate them, they may be assured that in the
end this country will see a revolution not unlike, in many re-
spects, to that in Germany. There is no small part of our
community, after all that we say and may justly say about the
prevalence of Christian faith among us, who would be glad of
an opportunity feirly to escape from the obligation which the
Bible imposes upon their consciences. They have been so
educated, however, that they cannot do this by embracing at
once, and in their revolting and blasphemous forms, the senti-
ments of a Paine, a Godwin, a Taylor (of London), or of a
much more insignificant class still — an Owen, a Fanny Wright,
or an Abner Kneeland. The gulf is too wide, deep, and foul,
to be inviting to them. But if some writer like Eichhorn should
rise up among us, who to all the charms of genius and taste
should add a widely diffused knowledge of classical and sacred
learning, and who should attack the genuineness of the sacred
writings on grounds of archaeological history and criticism ; in a
word, if any one should by his talents and learning contribute to
make the cause of skepticism respectable among the well in-
formed classes of society ; I doubt not that sooner or later we
should have a large neological party in our country. I ask ev-
ery sober and enlightened man, who is well acquainted with
the state of feeling among men of the world, whether irreligion,
or skepticism, if once made respectable by an appearance of
learned investigation and great talents, would not be gratefully
accepted by many, in order to get rid of the burden that now
lies on their consciences, in consequence of their education, or-
of the influence of the circles of friends in which they now
move.

For my own part, I cannot doubt of this. Of course I can-
not doubt the expediency of preparing for the great contest
which must ensue, if once the views of Neologists shall become
current among us. I would not anticipate these, and difiuse-
them prematurely. Sufficient for the day is the evil thereof.
It is not good policy, rather, I would say, it is not sound pru-
dence, to fill the ears of the community with reports of dan-
ger coming upon the cause of truth, which is new, unexpected^
and of a highly threatening character. A general need not pro-
claim in glowing language to his army, on the eve of contest,
the terrible power of the enemy with whom they are to com-
bat, and thus send them into the field half-conqueved before the

S70 Genuineness of the Gotpeb. [Ap&u*

onset of battle. But on the other hand, he may easily cany
his discretion in this respect a great deal too far. If the enemy
^hom the general is to meet are furnished with a new sort of
«rms, have acquired some new military tactics which are for-
midable, or posted themselves on vantage ground unknown to
his own army, then be would be rash indeed not to inform his
soldiers of all this, and not to instruct them how they are to cope
with and overcome these new or formidable means of attack or
resistance.

Such, in some respects, I deem the situation of our commu-
nity to be. The progress of German literature, and of that
part of it which is neohgtcal^ cannot now be prevented. If it
is impeded here and there, it will burst out in other places.
There are among us literary men enough, and men rather in-
clined to skepticism, to think and act for themselves in the
choice and purchase of books. There are learning and talent
enough displayed in many — very many — of the German neologi-
cal works, to excite curiosity highly, and at least to command
literary respect. It is not within the power, then, of the sober,
believing, religious part of the community, to put a stop to the
reading and diffiision of such works. And this being most plain-
ly the state of the case, I think we have no way left but to pre-
pare for the worst, and to take the vantage ground if we can in
the contest, by shewing those who would attack the cause of
settled belief in the Scriptures, that neither their attacks are un-
provided for by us, nor their weapons or tactics unknown to us.

Let us not dream of a black listy an index eoopurgaiorius,
of books, in this free country and Protestant land, from access
to which our youth or others are prohibited. Some parents
have tried the experiment of shutting up their children from all
intercourse with others, in order to keep them from being con-
taminated. The result has nearly always been, that when they
did go out at last into the world, being strangers in point of ex-
perience to all its temptations and allurements, they fell an easy
prey to them, and were undone for life. So in the case before
us ; particularly, I would say, in regard to young men who are
now in a course of education for the ministry. If we keep them,
either in Seminaries or under private tuition, from all acquaint-
ance with what neology has done or is now doing in respect to
the Scriptures either of the Old Testament or the New, when
they go out into the world they will meet with those who have
drunk in the new doctrines. They will be attacked by them ;

1838.] Genuineness of the Oatpeb. 271

attacked with the learning and skill which Eichhom and others
of the like cast have furnished^ ready to their hand ; and they
will, from the necessity of the case, be shocked and confounded
by the assault, if not overthrown. Besides this too, many sen-
sible inquirers among the laity, who have heard conversation
on topics involved in such a controversy, or read something
concerning them, will be naturally led to inquire of their pastor
what all thb means. If he is ignorant of it, or cannot in any
becoming and satisfactory manner solve their doubts or quiet
their apprehensions, then their difficulties will be increased^ and
in all probability will end in a state of skepticism.

Semper paraiusy then, should be the maxim of the young
theologian, at a time like this. And if this be so, then I would
ask, whether there- is any way so good, for those who direct
the studies of young men that are candidates for the ministry,
as prudently and cautiously to make known to them the sub-
stance of neological doctrine, whether critical or theological, and
instruct them how to answer the objections which it raises.
What ! Shall we spend weeks and months in combating the
infidels and skeptics of early ages or of past generations ; must
Hume and Collins and Shaftsbury and Tolland and Tindal be
met and refuted, at all points and with great care, although they
have mostly argued on grounds that are merely a priori^ and
shall the far more powerful and subtle skeptics of the present
day, whose appeal is professedly to antiquity and criticism, be
passed by in silence, or studiously excluded from the circle of
our consideration ? Believe this who may, I cannot accede to
It. Every age has its own peculianties, its own dangers, its
own corruptions, and its own weapons of assault upon the Scrip-
tures. It is not meet that we should live so much out of the
age to which we belong, and be conversant only with times that
are forever gone by.

I have made these remarks in order to show, that the work
of Mr. Norton is not in any measure to be deemed superfluous,
because we have the works of Lardner, Paley, and others of a
similar character in English, or the works of Schmidt, Less,
Kleuker, etc., in German and Latin. Mr. Norton has, in the
Preface to his work, given us reasons why he entered de novo
upon the investigations which led to it — reasons which I think
ought to satisfy every one who is acquainted with the present
state of sacred criticism and literature.

In order that the readers of this Periodical may obtain some

973 Oenuineness of the Gospdi. [ AmL

definite view of the positions which have been taken by leading
Neologists in respect to the genuineness of the Gospels, it is
proper that some extracts from Eichhom's Introduction to the
New Testament should here be presented. Complaint cannot
be made that this class of writers are unfairly dealt with in our
statements respecting them, when they are left to speak for them-
selves. I cannot do better here, than to introduce an extract
from Mr. Norton's introductory Statement of the Ccue, viz. of
the matter in dispute, or the subject which he has undertaken
to discuss. The passages with double commas at the beginning
and end are translations by him from Eichhom ; the remabder
consists of his own remarks, intermixed for the sake of illustration
and in order to secure accuracy of statement.

^^ Justin Martyr,^^ says Eichhom, ^ who was bom A. D. 89, and
died A. D. 163, a Samaritan, a native of Flavia Neapolis, early be-
came converted from a heathen philosopher to a zealous Christian,
and was one of the earliest Christian writers. He nowhere quotes
the life and sayings of Jesus according to our present four Gospels,
which he was not acquainted with. This is a very important cir-
cumstance in regard to the history of the Gospels ; as he bad devo-
ted many years to travel, and resided a long time in Italy and Asia
Minor."

On the whole, it is concluded by Eichhom and others, that our
four Gospels, in their present form^ were not in use, and were not
known, till the end of the second century. Previously to that time,
it is supposed, that other gospels were in circulation, allied to those
which we possess, but not the same. '^ If we will not,*^ says Eich-
bom, *^ be influenced by mere assertions and unsupported tradidon,
but by the only sure evidence of history, we must conclude that be-
fore our present Gospels, other decidedly different gospels were in
circulation, and were used during the first two centunes in the in-
struction of Christians.^^ Eichhom, however, does not deny that
the canonical Gospels are, in a certain sense^ the works of the au-
•thons to whom they have been ascribed. He expressly defends the
jgenuineness of that of John ; and with regard to the three others, he
says : ^^ According to the uniform tradition of the Church, the first
three Gospels proceeded from Matthew, Mark, and Luke. This
tradition is not to be called in question, unless therc arc strong rea-
sons against it ; and where arc such reasons to be found ?^' He con-
lends, however, that the Gospels have been grossly corrupted. His
statements respecting this subject arc connected with his account of
Jthe supposed common ori^n of the first three of our present Gos-
f)els, and of the gospels which he believes to have been in use before
those we flow possess. This account is as follows :

1888.] Genuineness of the Oospels. 273

There was very early m ejristence a short historical sketch of the
life of Christ, which may be called the Original Gospel. This was,
probably, provided for the use of those assistants of the apostles in
the work of teaching Christianity, who had not themselves seen the
actions and heard the discourses of Christ. It was however but * a
rough sketch, a brief and imperfect account, without historical plan
or methodical arrangement.' In this respect it was, according to
Eichhom, very different from our four Grospels. " These present
no rough sketch, such as we must suppose the first essay upon the
life of Jesus to have been ; but, on the contranr, are works written
with art and labor, and contain portions of his life, of which no men-
tion was made in the first preaching of Christianity." This Original
Ooepel was the basis both of the earlier gospels used during the first
two centuries, and of the first three of our present Gospels, "namely,
those of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, by which those earlier gospels
were finally superseded. The earlier gospels retained more or less
of the rudeness and incompleteness of the Original Gospel.

'^ But they very soon fell into the hands of those who undertook
to supply their defects and incompleteness, both in the general com-
pass of the histoiy, and in the narration of particular events. Not
content with a life of Jesus, which, like the gospel of the Hebrews,
and those of Marcion and Tatian, commenced with his public ap-
pearance, there were those who early prefixed to the Memoirs used
by Justin Martyr, and to the gospel of Cerinthus, an account of his
descent, his birth, and the period of his youth. In like manner, wo
find, upon comparing together, in parallel passages, the remaining
fragments of these gospels, that they were receiving continual ac-
cessions. The voice from heaven at the baptism of Jesus, was ori-
ginally stated to have been : Thou art my Son ; this day have I be-
gotten thee ; as it is quoted by Justin Martyr in two places. Cle-
ment of Alexandria found the same, in a gospel of which we have
no particular description, with the addition of the word, ' beloved' :
Thou art my beloved son ; this day have I begotten thee. Other
gospels represented the voice as having been : Thou art my beloved
S(m, toith whom I am well pleased ; as it is given in the catholic
Gospels, namely, in Mark 1: 11. In the gospel of the Ebionites,
according to Epiphanius, both accounts of the voice from heaven
were united : Thou art my beloved son^ xcith whom I am well pleas-
ed ; and again ; This day have I begotten thee. By these continual
accessions, the original text of the life of Jesus was lost in a mass of
additions, so that its words appeared among them but as insulated
fragments. Of this any one may satisfy himself from the account
of the baptism of Jesus, which was compiled out of various gospels.
The necessary consequence was, that at last truth and falsehood,
authentic and fabulous narratives, or such, at least, as through long
tradition had become disfigured and falsified, were brought together

Vol. XI. No. 30. 35

S74 Genuineneis of the Gospels, [April

promiscuously. The longer these narratives passed from mouth to
mouth, the more uncertain and disfigured they would become. At
last, at the end of the second and the beginning of the third century,
in order, as far as might be, to preserve the true accounts concern*
ing the life of Jesus, and to deliver them to posterity as free from
error as possible, the jChurch, out of the many gospels which were
extant, selected four, which had the greatest markiB of credibility,
and the necessary completeness for common use. There are no
traces of our present Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, before
the end of the second and the beginning of the third century. Ire-
naeus, about the year 202, first speaks decisively of four gospels ;
and imagines all sorts of reasons for this particular number ; and
Clement of Alexandria, about the year 216, labored to collect divers
accounts concerning the origin of these four Gospels, in order to
prove that these alone should be acknowledged as authentic. From
these facts, it is evident, that first, about the end of the second and
the be^nning of the third century, the Church labored to establish
the universal authority of these four Gospels, which were m exis-
tence before, if not altogether in their present form, yet in most re-
spects such as we now have them, and to procure their general re-
ception in the Church, with the suppression of all other gospels then
extant

" Posterity would indeed have been under much greater obliga-
tions, if, together with the Grospel of John, the Church had establish-
ed, by pubnc authority, only the first rough sketch of the life of Je-
sus, which was given to the earliest missionaries to authenticate their
preaching ; af\er separating it from all its additions and augmenta-
tions. But this was no longer possible ; for there was no copy ex-
tant free from all additions, ana the critical operation of separating
this accessory matter was too difficult for those times.''

^' Many ancient writers o[ the church,'' Eichhorn subjoins in a
note, *'*' doubted the genuineness of megiy parts of our Gospels ; but
were prevented from coming to a decision by want of critical skill ;"
pp. 6---13.

I trust the readers of this Miscellany will not find fault with
the length of this extract. Many of them, who have often
beard of German Neology, and no^ and then met with some
fragments of it here and there introduced and discussed, may
not have had the opportunity of reading a brief expose written
by the neological Coryphaeus of the past generation. The ex-
tracts just made present them with such a view ; and the re-
marks which are subjoined here and there by Mr. Norton, ex-
hibit a candid and correct account of the case as it actually
stands.

The chief aim of the text or leading part of Mr. Norton's

1888.] , OemdnenessoftheGaspels, S75

book, is to examine these positions of Eichhorn in relation to
the Gospels. In order to do this, be divides his vrork into two
parts ; in the first of which he endeavours to establish the pro-
position, that '' the. Gospels remain essentially the same as they
were originally composed ;" and in the second, that '^ they ha^e
been ascribed to their true authors J^

In proof of his first proposition, he labours, in Chap. I., to
shew ^^ the agreement of the respective copies of the four Gos-
pels," i. e. the uniformity or harmony of the same Gospels,
which exists between all the difi[erent manuscripts or copies of
them in different ages and countries, or (in other words) the
uniformity of text which pervades the totality of them at all
times and in all places.

In order not to be misunderstood, the author begins by in-
forming his readers what exceptions are to be made to this gen-
eral declaration. He does not suppose the present Greek text
of Matthew to be the original^ but only an early translation of
the original Hebrew copy which was current in Palestine. Nor
does be suppose, that no accident has ever befallen any single
word^ phrase, or verse, of any of the Gospels, but that these
books have been exposed, like other ancient books, to some er-
rors and variations introduced by copyists and others throuj^h
mistake on various grounds aind from a variety of causes. He
enumerates what he believes to be interpolations ; in which he
is much more liberal to his opponents, than I, with my present
views, can possibly persuade myself to be. The two first
chapters of Matthew, he thinks, did not belong to the original
Gospel of thb writer ; as also Matt. 27: 3 — 10, eontaining the
narrative respecting Judas' repentance and suicide ; and Matt.
27: 52, 53, containing an account of the resurrection of many
saints and their appearance in Jerusalem after the resurrection
of the Saviour. Luke 22: 43, 44, which relates that an angel
appeared and strengthened the Saviour during his agony and
bloody sweat, is also, in his apprehension, of a suspicious char-
acter ; and John 21 : 24, 25, (the last part of v. 24 and the
whole of V. 25) " has the air of an editorial note." Besides
these, John 3: 3, 4, (the last clause of v. 3 and the whole of
V. 4), containing the passages respecting angelic influence on the
waters of the pool at Bethesda, is very questionable ; and John
8: 3 — 10, containing an account of the woman that was taken
in the act of adultery and brought to Jesus, is '^justly regarded
by a majority of modem critics, as not having been a part of the
original Gospel."

276 Genmneness of the Gospels, [April

It is proper that we should hear him speak for himself as to
the manner in which he supposes these iDteriK)lations to have
been made.

The two passages last mentioned, and the other interpolations
that have been suggested, that is, the two insertions into the body of
the text of the original Hebrew of Matthew's Gospel, and one into
that of Luke's Gospel, were, we may suppose, first written as notes
or additional matter in the margin of some copies of the Gospel in
which they are found. But passages belonging to the text of a
work, which had been accidentally omitted by a transcriber, were,
hkewise, often preserved in the margin. From this circumstance,
notes and additional matter, thus written, were not unfrequenlly mis-
taken for parts of the text, and introduced by a subsequent copier
into what he thought their proper place. This is a fruitful source of
various readings in ancient wntings ; and may explain how the pas-
sages in question, if not genmne, have become incorporated with the
text of the Gospels ; p. 25 seq.

After these remarks he goes on and endeavours to shew,
that all these interpolations might have been made in the ordi-
nary course of things, whhout any design to corrupt the Gospels.
The veiy fact that spurious passages can be thus distinguished
from the original, is a pledge, as he intimates, for the integrity
of the rest ; and at all events, as he more than once intimates
in other passages, nothing important in regard to Christian doc-
trine, or duty is lost, in case we exclude the interpolations in
question.

On this part of Mr. Norton's treatise I shall take occasion
hereafter to make some remarks, and particularly to inquire,
whether it is so clear, as he seems to consider it, that the origi-
nal Gospel of Matthew was written in Hebrew, and that the
two first chapters areniade up of extraneous matter, composed
by another author. For the present therefore 1 dismiss these
topics, in order to pursue the main object of Mr. Norton's book,
and to she^w the manner in wliich he has treated his subject.

The essential aL^reeinent of the Mss. of the Gospels is thus
briefly and strikingly slated by him.

There have been examined, in a greater or less degree, about six
hundred and seventy manuscripts of the whole, or of portions, of the
Greek text of the Gospels. These were written in difierent coun-
tries, and at different periods, probably from the fifth century, down-
wards. They have been found in places widely remote from each
other, in Asia, in Africa, and from one extremity of Europe to the
other. Besides those manuscripts of the Greek text, there are many

1888.] Oemdneness of the Oospels, ^ 277

manuacripls of ancient versions of the Gospels, in at least eleven
different languages of the three great divisions of the world just men«
tioned. There are, likewise, many manuscripts of the works of the
Christian fathers., abounding in quotations from the Gospels ; and,
especially, of ancient commentaries on the Gospels, such as those
of Origen, who lived in the third century, and of Chrysostom, who
lived in the fourth ; in which we find their text quoted, as the difler-
ent portions of ii are successively the subjects of remark.

Now, all these different copies of the Gospels, or parts of the Gos-
pels, so numerous, so various in their character, so unconnected, of-
fering themselves to notice in parts of the woild so remote from each
other, concur in giving us essentially the same text ; p. 28 seq.

After some explanatory remarks he proceeds thus :

The agreement amon^ the extant copies of any one of the Gros-
pels, or of portions of it, is essential ; the disagreements are acci-
dental and trifling, originating in causes, which, from the nature of
things, we know must have been in operation. Every copy of any
one of the Gospels presents us with essentially the same work, the
same general history, the same particular facts, the same doctrines,
the same precepts, the same characteristics of the writer, the same
form of narration, the same style, and the same use of language ;
and by comparing together difierent copies, we are able to ascertain
the original text to a great degree of exactness ; or, in other words,
where various readings occur, to determine what were probably the
words of the author. The Greek manuscripts^ then, of any one of
the Gospels, the versions of it, and the quotations from it by the fa-
thers, are all, professedly, copies of that Gospel or of parts of it ;
and these copies correspond with each other. But as these profess-
ed copies thus correspond with each other, it follows that they were
derived more or less remotely from one archetype. Their agree-
ment admits of no explanation, except that of their being conformed
to a common exemplar. In respect to each of the Gospels, the cop-
ies which we possess must all be referred, for their source, to one
original Gospel, one original text, one original manuscript. As far
back as our knowledge extends. Christians, throughout all past ages,
in Syria, at Alexandria, at Borne, at Carthage, at Constantinople,
and at Moscow, in the east and in the west, have all used copies of
each of the Grospeb, which were evidently derived from one origi-
nal manuscript, and necessarily imply that such a manuscript, ex-
isting as their archetype, has been faithfully copied ;. p. 29 seq.

After these just and very apposite remarks, the author goes
OQ to shew, in a very graphic manner, what an ollapodrida
the text of the Gospek would have been* — a Mischmasch truly,
as Bertholdt rashly enough asserts of the Textus Receptiis —

878 Oemdnenen of the OotptU. [April

in case the original copies of the Gospels had been dealt with
in the manner that Eichborn has stated. Well has he said,
that ^ they would have been as unlike, as the Arabic copies of
the Arabian Nights' Entertainment, or the Mss. of the Oesta
Romanorum.* He might have gone still further. From the
frequency with which they have been copied, and from the na-
ture of the case where so much of the miraculous is exhibited^
they would have been, it is nearly certain, much more discre-
pant than the copies of those fictions.

It would be doing injustice to this weighty argument not to
exhibit the remarks which the author makes upon it.

The argument which has been employed, seems easy to be com-
prehended; and at the same time conclusive of the fact, that all our
present copies of each of the Gospels are to be traced back to one
ori^al manuscript, in multiplying the copies of which, no such lib*
erties can have been taken by transcribers, as are supposed in the
hypothesis under consideration. The argument seems, likewise,
very obvious ; yet its force and bearing appear to have been over-
looked in framing that hypothesis. The fact does not seem to have
been distinctly adverted to, that the transcriber or possessor of a
manuscript, making such alterations as the h3rpothesis supposes,
could introduce them only into a single copy, and into such others
as mi^ht be transcribed from it ; and that he could not, properly
speakmg, add to or corrupt the work itself. His copy would have
no influence upon contemporary copies ; and in the case of the Gos-
pels, we may say, upon numerous contemporary copies, in whk;h
the true text might be preserved, or into which mfierent alteratioos
might be introduced, it is quite otherwise, since the invention of
printing. He who now introduces a corruption into the printed edi-
tion of a work, introduces it into all the copies of that edition ; if it
be the only edition, into all the copies of that work ; and in many
cases, into a great majority of the copies which are extant, or which
are most accessible. All these copies will agree in presenting us
with the same changes or interpolations. He may properly be said
to corrupt the work itself. .... The power of an ancient copier to
sJter the text of a work was very different from that of a modem
editor ; yet it would seem, that they must have been confounded in
the hypothesis under consideration ; unless some further account is
to be given of the manner, in which the text of our present Gospek
has been formed and perpetuated ; p. 33 seq.

In the Notes which have relation to the integrity and unifor-
mity of the text of the Gospels, are some very interesting and
usefiil remarks and illustrations. But I shall nave occasion to
advert again and separately to them, in the sequel.

1838.] Gemdnenen of the Oospeb. 87»

Eichhorn, whose mind could not but be apprehensive of the
substantial uniformity of the Gospel-text^ the world over, and
who could not resist the feeling that some plausible account, at
least, of this extraordinary phenomenon should be given, has
suggested that in process oi time, i. e. as he thinks, near the
end of the second and the beginning of the third century, * the
Churchy out of the many Gospels which were extant^ selected
four which had the greatest marks of credibility , and the ne-^
cessary completeness for common use.^

The answer to this by Mr. Norton, is complete and absolute-
ly overwhelming. After indulging so much in extracts as I
have already done, and must hereafter do, I shall refrain from
presenting it at length before the reader in the words of the
author. Suffice it to say, that he has strikingly exhibited the
facts, that the church was at that period not a regularly organized
body having extended ecclesiastical jurisdiction. There were
no general councils ; no acknowledged single or complex bead ;
no religion established and regulated by civil law ; — ^ina word,
no appointed and generally acknowledged authority of any kind^
either to sanction or condemn books for the whole church.
Besides all this, the churches were in a state of persecution ;
they were separated from each other by distance, by diversity
of habits, manners, customs and language; and tbe eastern
churches, moreover, had been excommunicated by the western^
i. e. by Victor of Rome, before the period in question, so that
great asperity of feeling existed in various respects between
them. Under circumstances like these ; and also, I may add,
when editorial criticism on Mss. and editions was a thing un*
practised to any considerable extent, and in some respects
novel and strange ; the supposition of Eichhorn is an absurdi-
ty— an utter and palpable absurdity. It has not the shadow
of a fact lo rest upon, and is altogether a fancy, like a multitude
of others which he has thrown out upon the world, generated
purely in his own fancy-loving brain.

I cannot forbear, however, from giving the reader the closing;
paragraph of this prostrating assault upon Eichhom's position..
It runs thus :

But we may even put out of view all the preceding considerations..
*^ The Church,'' it is said, "• about the end of the second, and the be-
ginning of the third century, first labored to procure the general re*
ception of the four Gospels in the Church.'' By the Church, must
be meant the great boay of Christians. The general reception of

880 Genuineness of Ae Oospeb. [ Armx.

the Gospels was founded upon the belief, real or pretended, of their
being the genuine works of those to whom they were ascribed.
The statement, therefore, resolves itself into the following dilemma.
Either the great body of Christians determined to believe what they
knew to be false ; or they determined to profess to believe it. The
first proposition is an absurdity in terms ; the last is a moral ab-
surdity ; p. 40 seq.

On p. 42 seq. the reader will find a long and interesting Note,
which contains an examination of some additional positions of
Eichhorn's in the second edition of his Introduction to the New
Testament, and which are in themselves substantial contradio
tion of his opinion as stated in the preceding paragraphs. Yet
although he has, in this new edition, represented the present
copies of our Gospels as coming in tacitly and without oppo-
sition during the period between A. D. 150 and 175, and this
by virtue of weight and authority given to them in conseqiience
of their titles, (i. e. The Gospel according to Matthew, marJCy
etc.), yet in another part of this second edition he has left the
passages that have been quoted and examined above, just as
they were in the first edition of his work. This, on the part
of Eichhorn, is presuming a great deal, either on the good na*
ture of the public toward him, or on their stupidity ; for stu-
pid they must indeed be, in case they should not perceive that
bis two positions are quite at variance with each other.

The general argument in favour of the integrity of the New
Testament Mss. and Codices down to the present time, as ex-
hibited in the preceding pages, may be applied, as Mr. Norton
supposes, in its full strength, to the Mss. in circulation near the
•end of the second century. In order to shew how difficult it
would have been to bring about any considerable changes in
«copies of the Gospels at that day, Mr. Norton endeavours to
calculate, as near as may be, how many copies of these, at the
least estimation of their numbers, must have been in circulation.

Our present Gospels, it is conceded, were in common use among
Christians about the end of the second century. The number of
manuscripts then in existence bore some proportion to the number
of Christians, and this, to the whole population of the Roman empire.
The population of the Roman empire in the time of the Antooines
is estimated by Gibbon at about one hundred and twenty millions ;
■and, probably, it had not decreased at the period of which we are
speaking. With rejgard to the proportion of Christians, the same
writer observes : " The most favourable calculation will not permit

1838.] Gemineness of the Ga9peh. 981

us to loiagiiie, that more than a twentieth part of the suljects of the
empire bad enlisted themeelves under the banner of the croes before
the important conversion of Constantino.'^ If not more than a twen-
tieth part of the empire was Christian at the end of the third century,
just aAer which the conversion of Constantino took place, we can
hardly estimate more than a fortieth part of it as Christian at the end
of the second century ; p. 45 seq.

The author then adduces several passages, and very striking
ones they are, from Pliny and Tertullian, which shew that the
estimate ofone fortieth part for Christians, falls, in all probability,
very far short of the truth. He accepts it however, because
he chooses to come much within the bounds that may be thought
iust and proper, rather than hazard any thing by going a step
beyond them. He then proceeds :

" The fortieth part of one hundred and twenty millions, the esd-
mated population of the empire, is three miUions. There were
Christians without the bounds of the empire, but I am willing to in-
clude those also in the number supposed. At ihe end of the second
century, then, there were three millions of believers, using our pres-
ent Gospels, regarding them with the highest reverence, and anxious
to obtain copies of them. Few possessions could have been more
highly valued by a Christian than a copy of those books, which con-
tained the history of the religion for which he was exposing himself
to the severest sacrifices. Their cost, if he were able to defray it,
must have been but a very trifling consideration. But a common
copy of the Gospels was not a book of any ereat bulk or expense.
I shall not, therefore, I think, be charged with over estimating, if I
suppose that there was one copy of the Gospels for every ^^
Christians. Scattered over the world as they were, if the proportion
of them to the heathens was no greater than has been assumed, fifty
Christians would often be as many as were to be f6und in any one
place, and often more ; but we cannot suppose that there were many
collections of Christians without a copy of the Gospels. Origen,
upon quoting a passage from the New Testament, says that it is
written not ^^ in any rare books, read only by a few studious persons ;
but in those in the most common use.'' In truth, there can be little
doubt, that copies of the Gospels were owned by a lar^ portion of
Chrisdans who had the means of procuring them ; and m supposing
only one copy of these books for every fifty Christians, the estimate
is probably much within the truth. This proportion, however, will
tdve us sixty thousand copies of the Gospels for three millions of
Christians ; pp. 49 — 52.

To forestall the objection here, that the copies of the Gos-
pels could not have been so numerous, because of the high price

Vol. XI. No. 30. 36

S83 GemdnenesM of the Ootpdi. [Apbii#

of IVfss. in ancient times, the author has given us in a Nole,
some matter of curious interest respecting the price of ancient
books. Martial, in his Epigrams, has stated the price of hi»
13th book, which contains 272 verses, to have been four set--
tertii; or, if this should be thought too much, itoo sesteriii,
which would still leave a profit, as he says, to the bookseller*
The last named sum amounts to about seven cents of our money*

With such facts in view, one can scarcely refrain from believ-
ing, that the estimate of 60,000 copies of the Gospefs as being
in circulation at the close of the second century, is far — ^very
far — within the bounds of truth. Other facts adduced by the
author cast still more light on the subject, and render it altogeth-
er probable, in my apprehension, that if he had doubled, or even
trebled, the number of copies, be would still have been within
the bounds of truth and soberness.

Now as Ivenaeus, about 180, asserts the general reception
and acknowledged authority among Christians of the four Gros-
pels, in language as strong and as unlimited as would be employed
at the present moment, it must follow of course, as Mr. Norton
justly concludes, that these Gospels had been a long time in
circulation, in order to be so widely diffused and universally re-
ceived.

In Chapter II. Mr. Norton proceeds to adduce other consid-
erations, which serve to confirm the position which he has taken*
He shows, in the first place, that ^^ it would have been inconsis-
tent with the common sentiments and practice of mankind, for
transcribers to make such alterations and additions as have been
imagined, in the sacred books which they were copying.'^
Such practices do not appear in the works of Thucydides, Ta-
citus, and other historians. But the Gospels, in addition to the
usual motives for care in transcription, present the highly impor-
tant and influential ones which are drawn from their being deem-
ed sacred. They were the basis of the Christian religion, in-
asmuch as the words and deeds of Jesus, recorded in them, must
foe the foundation of this religion. It would have been deemed
sacrilegious, therefore, to have purposely mutilated or disfigured
these records in any way whatever.

To illustrate and confirm this. Mr. Norton brings passages
from Papias, Justin Martyr, Dionysius of Corinth, Irenaeua,
Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian and others, which are quite
to his purpose, and fully exhibit the common sentiments of
Christians at that time, in respect to preserving the integrity of

1888.] Getwinmeis of the Ooipds. 883

the sacred books. He might have appealed, moreoYer^ to the
commoD sentiments and views of the Jews, in relation to trans-
eribiog the Old Testament m general, but particularly the Pen-
tateuch. The Tractatiu Sophtrtniy written no doubt at an early
period, exhibits such mbute rules and prescriptions in regard to
copybts, as no other book on earth, I believe, can be found to
exhibit. The prevailing sentiment among Christians must in
all probability have been such, in regard to their sacred books,
as the Jews firom whom they derived them were wont to enter-
tain.

Another view of this subject b presented by Mr. Norton.
The Christian writers near the close of the second century and
at the beginning of the third, bring reiterated charges against
Maicion and other heretics, for mutilating and altering the sa-
cred books. The severe censure which they cast upon them
on account of this, does not leave us at liberty to suppose that
such alterations were things of every day's occurrence among
Christians in general.

In particular does Mr. Norton advert, and with great justice
and propriety, to the critical works of Origen, as fiirnishing evi-
dence against the supposed alterations and variations of the
Mew Testament Mss. Origen furnished a critical edition of
the Septuagint firamed on the basis of comparison of Mss. He
had a critical taste, and was very much inclined to indulge it.
Yet all the discrepancies which he notices in the New Testa-
ment Mss., are such as, for the most part, are still to be found
in them, having been so long and faithfully preserved.

Our author next goes into an. examination of a passage in
Origen, which has often been quoted, in order to confirm such
statements as Eichhom has made, concerning the alterations
and variations in the ancient Mss. He shows, and I think sat-
is&ctorily, that no more than the common and well-known sour-
ces of error at all times are asserted by Origen. Certainly, if
we compare this passage with the variations actually exhibited
in this rather's critical and exegetical wdrks, we cannot suppose
that any thing less than an extravagant estimate has been made
of it by neologists in criticism. Compared with a passage from
Griesbach, produced here in a Note by Mr. Norton, Origen's
language is quite moderate and tame ; and yet, as we shall see
in the sequel, Griesbach had but little ground indeed, even after
the lapse of so many centuries and so much time and room for
variations, to make such an assertion.

284 Oenuineness of the Gorpels, [April

I may well recommeDd to the sober and inquisitive reader,
other remarks which the author here makes upon Origen's
words, and also upon the representations of other ancient writers,
in respect to the text of the Gospels.

Nor are the remarks of Mr. ^forton less striking, upon the
specific and individual character of each Gospel, in regard to
its style and manner throughout. Each one has its own pecu-
liar characteristics, which are uniformly preserved. Now this
could never have been so, had additions and alterations- been
continually made from time to time, as they are represented by
some to have been. One very striking proof of this is exhibi-
ted by Mr. Norton in his Addenda, Note C : where he presents
us with three interpolations which are contained in some Codi-
ces, but which are so manifestly foreign to the style, manner,
and matter of the Evangelists, that even the most unpractised
reader could not fail to discover that they must be adscititbus.
One of these is an addition inserted after Matt. 20: 28. On
this I must beg leave to make a few remarks.

I shall not occupy these pages, by inserting the evidently
spurious addition just named. But, as no attentive critical rea-
der will, at the present day, fail to judge as Mr. Norton has
done respecting it, and this on the ground that the internal evi-
dence of foreign and extrinsic origin is overwhelming and de-
cisive ; so I have a suggestion to make here, for Mr. Norton's
consideration. If this mterpolation of some three or four vers-
es, is so plainly disclosed by its own style and matter, how
comes it about that the whole of the two first chapters of this
same Evangelist could consist of extraneous and adscititious
matter, and yet there be no difference of style or manner from
that of the book in general ? That there is not any perceptible
diflference, is a fact which I would establish by appeal to the

{'iidgraent of every impartial reader. Nay, that positive resera-
)lances, not to say identities, of style are spread over the whole
of the two chapters in question, has been made out, in a man-
ner past all fair contradiction, by Gersdorf in his Beitragt zur
Sprach'Characieristik der Scriftsteller des iV. Testaments.
This I take to be generally admitted.

The reply of Mr. Norton would probably be, that * this uni-
formity or similarity of style arises from the hand of one and
the same translator of the whole book from the Hebrew origi-
nals.' But this cannot be satisfactory. The literdity of an-
cient translations is too well known to be in general called in

1888.] Ge$in$mene$s of the Ooipeb. 285

Suestion* At all events, the fidelity of the translator of Mat«
lew, if there were any such person, must have been early and
universally conceded ; for in the very next generation after the
apostles, we have decisive evidence, i. e. in Justin Martyr, that
the two first chapteis of Matthew were regarded and quoted as
a part of his Gospel — and of his Gospel in Greek. Of this
however, I intend to speak hereafter. It is enough for the pres-
ent to say, that nothing less than a designed transformation of
the original, in the process of translation into the Greek, can be
supposed, if we maintain the ground that the two first chapters
of Matthew are an interpolation. No translator of that early
age could have so perfectly assimilated, in matter and manner,
two different writers, unless he bad a fixed and steady purpose
ei this nature, and intended to deceive bis readers, by making
them believe that there was but one original author. Even
then we cannot suppose any translator of that day had skill
enough to effect his purpose. Nor have we any evidence, eith-
er from the nature oi the work, or from the credit attached to it,
of any thing else than an honest and simple version ; if indeed it
be a version, and not an original.

I repeat my question, then, to Mr. Norton : How can two
writers be so exactly alike, as the author of the two first, and
the last twenty-six chapters of Matthew ? It is against all that
he has so truly and strikingly said, on pp. 78 — 62 of his work,
respecting the marked peculiarities and differences of style be-
tween Mark, Luke, and John. Why has he been silent there,
throughout this paragraph, on the characteristics of Matthew ?
Plainly they are not less marked, nor less uniform and general,
than those of either of the other Evangelists. And this, I must
add, is one of the most unaccountable of all circumstances, if
the book in its present form be a translation — and a translation
from two different authors.

I am constrained to believe, that Mr. Norton felt some pres-
sure here ; and he has managed this difficulty by keeping silence
respecting the peculiar characteristics of Matthew, through the
whole of this interesting section of Chap. II. Not* does what
he has said of this Evangelist, on p. 90 seq., bring to view this
topic.' — ^But more of this anon. I return to the general course
of argument.

In ^ 7 of this chapter, Mr. Norton has shewn, in a very happy
manner, how every thing in the Gospels tallies with the times
V)hen and the places where they were composed ; how difficult.

886 Gemdneneii of the Oo9ptU* [Apbu.

nay iroposdble, it would l>e, for spurious and adulterated addi-
tions to preserve this concinnity ; and consequently, in case the
Gospels had been tampered with as Eicbhom supposes, how
easy it would be to detect this.

Near the close of the chapter, Mr. Norton presents us with
a summary of what it contains ; which on account of its impor-
tance and the pleasing manner of it, should be here given to the
reader.

We have seen then, in the present chapter, that there is no rea-
son to doubt that the Christians of the first two centuries had the
highest reverence for their sacred books ; and that with this senti-
ment, they could neither have made, nor have suffered, alterations
in the Gospels ; — that the manner in which the Christian fathers
speak of the corruptions with which they chai^;^ some of the here-
tics, implies, from the nature of the case, that they knew of no simi-
lar corruptions in their own copies of the Gospels ; — that from the
notice which Origen takes of the various reaoings found by him in
his manuscripts of the Grospels, we may conclude, that no considera-
ble diversity among the manuscripts of the Gospels had ever exis-
ted ; — that we may infer the same from all the other notices res-
pecting the text of the Gospels in the writings of the fathers ; and
from the absence of an v thing in their worbi, which might show,
that their copies dififerea more from each other, than those now ex-
tant ; — that the peculiar style of the Gospels generally, and the
uniform style of each Grospel, afford proof Uiat each is, essentially,
the work of one author, which has been preserved unaltered ; — ^tluit
this argument becomes more striking, when we consider, that far the
greater number of the copies of the Grospels, during ibe first two
centuries, were made by Grreek transcribers, who, if they had inter-
polated, would have interpolated in common Greek ; that it is from
copies made by them that our own are derived ; but that the Gos-
pels, as we possess them, are written, throughout, in that dialect of
the Greek, which was used only by Jews ; — that spurious works, or
spurious additions to genuLne> works^ may commonly be discovered
by some incongruity with the character or the circumstances of the
pretended author, or with the age to which they are assigned ; but
that with the exception, perhaps, of a few passages, the genuineness
of which is doubtful, no such mcongruity appears in the Gospels ; —
and lasdy, that the consistency preserved throughout each of the
Gospels in all that relates to the actions, discourses, and most extra-
ordinary character of Christ, shows that each is a work which re-
mains the same essentially as it was originally written, uncorrupted
by subsequent alterations and additions ; pp. 88—80.

The thetical part of this discussion being thus concluded, Mr.

1838.] Oenmneneu of the OosptU» 987

Norton comes next to the consideration of the objections and
difficulties that have been raised against such views as he has
defended. He informs us, that ' strongly as the corruption of
the Gospels has been asserted, he is unacquainted with any for-
mal statement of arguments in its proof.'

To the statement which immediately fdlows, I desire to ex-
press'^my most unqualified assent and to record my warmest ap-
probation. It is too good to be kept from the readers.

Those by whom it has been principally maintained, belong to that
class of German critics, who reject the belief of any thing properly
miraculous in the history of Christ. But the difficulty of reconciling
this disbelief of the miracles with the admission of the truth of facts
concerning him not miraculous, is matly increased, if the Gospels
be acknowledged as the uncorruptea works of those who were wit*
nesses of what they relate, or who derived their information imme*
diately from such witnesses. On the other hand, in proportion as
suspicion is cast upon the genuineness and authenticity of those
writings, the history of Christ becomes doubtful and obscure. An
opening is made for theories concerning his life, character, and works,
and the origin of his religion. Any account of our Saviour, upon
the supposition that he was not a teacher from God, endued with
miraculous powers, must be almost wholly conjectural. But such
a conjectural account will appear to less cusadvantage, if placed in
competition with narratives of uncertain origin, than if brought into
direct opposition to the authority of original witnesses ; pp. d4 — 96.

Mr. Norton then has cleared himself here most explicitly and
fully from the charge that has sometimes been made against him,
viz. that he is a Naturalist, or a so called Rationalist of the
lowest order. That the Saviour is a teacher from God, and en-
dued with miraculous powers, is what he openly declares him-
self to believe ; unless I have totally mistaken the drift of the
above passage. But I should be slow to believe that I have ;
for whatever Mr. Norton's religious views may be, I apprehend
that one of the last things justly chargeable against him would
be, hypocrisy and double dealing. He would not speak as he
here does, unless his belief were such as I have stated.

It may be proper, moreover, since I am upon this subject, to
bring into view another passage in Mr. Norton's Note, p. lxii.,
which I have read with great, although not with unmingled sat-
isfaction. The passage runs thus :

In regard to the main event related, the miraculous conception of
Jems, it seems to me not difficult to discern in it purposes worthy

288 Genuineneis of the Oospeis. [Apeil

of God. Nothing could have served more effectually to relieve
him from that interpositioQ and embarrassment in the performance
of his high mission, to which he would have been exposed on the
part of his parents, if born in the common course of nature. It took
him from their control, and made them feel, that in regard to him
they were not to interfere with the purposes of God, It gave him
an abiding sense from his earliest years, that his destiny on earth
was peculiar and marvellous ; and must have operated most power-
fully to produce that consciousness of his intimate and singular con-
nexion with God, which was so necessary to the formation of the
character he displayed, and to the right performance of the great
trust committed to him. It corresponds with his office ; presenting
him to the mind of a believer, as an individual set apart from all
other men, coming into the world with the stamp of God upon him,
answerably to his purpose here, which was to speak to us with au-
thority from God ; Note, p. Ixii.

I have said in respect to this last paragraph, that my satis&K>-
tion is not unnUngled ; and I have said this merely because
this paragraph, while containing what I deem to be truth and
nothing but truth, does not by any means contain what in my
view is the whole truth, in respect to the Saviour's origin. His
genetic history goes farther back, as I apprehend the subject,
than Mr* Norton has here intimated. John has given it to us
in his Gospel. " In the beginning was the Word." Mr, Nor-
ton, it would seem from the tenor of this paragraph, does not
admit the preeodstence of the Logos, and therefore has some
mode of interpretation by which he gives quite another turn to
the sense of John 1: 1 and other kindred passages, than that
which is commonly assigned to them. But in what tolerable
sense the Logos became flesh and dwelt among us, provided
that no preexistence is assigned to him before conception in the
womb of Mary, I have not yet seen ;nade out. Tliat Mr.
Norton has some interpretation which seems admissible to his
own mind, I doubt not. But he has no where told us in this
volume what it is. Nor do I blame him for this. He did not
design the volume to be an exposition of his theological creed,
nor a book of theological polemics. I do not recollect that he
has even once intimated, in the whole book, what his particular
views are respecting the nature and rank of the Logos and of
the Holy Spirit. It would be difficult, I believe, to make out
from his Treatise any where, that Mr. Norton is a LFnitarian ; al-
though those who are much conversant with doctrinal statements
ought coiyoctMre this, on the ground that every declaratioo of

1838.] Genuineness of the Oospels* 289

a positive nature, on this great subject, is carefuHy avoided,
I suppose it probable, that Mr. Norton stands in sentiment re-
specting this matter, nearly in the position where Lardner stood ;
and like him, he has throughout his work carefully avoided
every thing, in general, which would be justly offensive to any
party in the Christian church. In a book like his, this is ad-
missible, perhaps commendable. At least those who difier
from the author of this book in regard to the rank of being in
which the Saviour is to be placed, must allow him at least the
praise of courtesy, inasmuch as he has said little or nothing on
this subject which can justly offend them.

Most heartily can I go with Mr. Norton in the declarations
above quoted, which have given rise to these remarks. As
heartily can I go much farther ; but I am not persuaded that I
ought to find fault with him, because he has not taken occasion
here to avow his whole creed. He was not obliged to do so ^
and the expediency of so doing should be committed to his own
judgment.

But let us return to Mr. Norton's discussion of the objec-
tions against the genuineness of the Gospels. The principal
difficulties that have of late been raised, have sprung, as he sup-
poses, and probably with good reasons, from the theory of an
Original Gospel^ antecedent to our present Grospels, and the
common source from which the Evangelists have all drawn.

This Protevangeliumy however, did not itself remain unalter-
ed. Every or any possessor of it, as Eichhom and others sup-
pose, made what additions or alterations he pleased, according
as he was prompted to do this by traditional information, com-
municated either orally or by written documents which fell into
his hands. The Original Gospel, then, when it came into the
bands of the Evangelists, came in forms or editions (so to speak)
which differed much from each other. The primitive text was
mdeed the basis ; but the additions and emendations had very
much changed the appearance and the contents of that text.
Hence, as one Evangelist obtained one copy, and another fell
upon a different one, and as all drew from their respective
copies, so their agreement in very many instances can be ac-
counted for, while the ground of their disagreement is at the
same time apparent.

Will it be believed, in after generations, that such a theory
as this could have spread far and wide in the Christian world,
and that a great portion of the writers on the Gospels in Ger-

VoL. XI. No. 30. 37

9S0 Oemdnenea of the Oapeb. [ Aprxi.

many for the last fifty years have defended, or at least admitted
it ? But what is still more, can one believe that such a theory
should have been strenuously advocated in England, by no less
a person than the translator of Michaelis, the present Lord
Bishop of Peterborough ? Yet such is the case. In whatever
way we may account for it, we cannot doubt of the facts them-
selves. Writers of the graver cast, and such as do not mean to
consider themselves as attached to Neology, have often admit-
ted and built upon this theory. Thus we find Kuinoel, every
where in ,his Commentary on the first three Gospels, appealing
to the Frotevangelium for the solution of difficulties and the
explanation of apparent contrarieties.

Mr. Norton has judiciously reserved the discussion of this
subject for the Notes subjoined to his work. He has done
the same, in regard to several apocryphal Gospels which Eicb-
hom appeals to, as having existed antecedently to our present
Gospels, and sprung fi'oro the same Frotevangelium. I shall
therefore dismiss the subject of them for the present, mtending
to resume it in the sequel, when I come to speak of the Notes
in question. I would merely suggest here, with Mr. Norton
(p. 94), that the whole theory rests, and must rest, upon mere
presumption ; for no Original Gospel, such as it assumes, was
ever heard or spoken of, so far as we have any knowledge of
Christian antiquity, among the churches of the primitive or ear-
ly ages. But a mere presumption can not, on any proper
grounds of estimating evidence, be admitted to outweigh the
positive and abundant testimony to the genuineness of the pre-
sent Gospels, which has been produced.

That the reader may see to what shifts the defenders of these
multiplex Gospels are driven, I will produce a passage from our
author in which this matter is briefly stated, and briefly, but
conclusively, discussed.

It has been affirmed by Eichhorn, as a general truth, that '^ before
the invention of printing, in transcribing a manuscript, fhe most ar*
bitrary alterations were considered as allowable ; since they aflect-
ed only an article of private property, written for one's individual
use.*' This statement, which, if correct, would destroy the credit
of all ancient writings, seems to have been made through inadver-
tence ; and therefore, though apparently a principal argument in de-
fence of the supposed corruption of the Gospels, cannot be regard-
ed as a proper subject for particular remark. It is important only
as showmg, that in attacking the genuineness of their text, one is un-

1888.] Gemimmefs 0/ the Goipels. S9t

consciousiy led to aasume priiiciples which would equally prove the
ooiTuptioa of all other ancient workfl; p. 100.

The remainder of the first chapter is employed in discussing
some allegations of Celsus, of a slanderous nature, against the Gos-
pels. The answer which Mr. Norton makes is able and satis-
factory.

The summary with which this first part of Mr. Nonon's book
is conluded, should be here presented by way of brief recap-
itulation.

^ It [the genuineneas of the Gospels] appears from the essential
agreement among the very numerous copies of these books, so di-
verse in their character, and in their mode of derivation from the
oiiginal. This agreement among different copies could not have
existed, unless some archetype had been faithfully followed : and
this archetype, it has been shown, could have been no other than
the original text It appears from the reverence in which the Gos-
pels were held by the early Christians ; and the deep sense which
ibey had of the impropriety and guilt of making any alteration in
those^ writings. It appears from the historical notices respecting
their text, which are wholly inconsistent with the supposition of its
having sufiered essential corruptions. And, finally, it appears from
the internal character of the books themselves, which show no marks
of gross, intentional interpolation ; but, on the contrary, exhibit a
consistency of style and conception, irreconcilable with the suppo-
sition of it ; pp. 107, seq.

Part II. presents us with the evidence that the Oo^ls have
been aicribed to their true authors.

It is agreed on all hands, that at or near the close of the
second century, the four Grospels were generally, or rather uni-
versally received in the church, with the exception of a party
or parties of heretics. Mr. Norton therefore goes on to shew,
that they were attributed to the then reputed authors during the
time which preceded this, i.e. in the earliest ages of the churchy
This he does by appeal to all the leading early Christian writers ;
some of them within the second century, and some of them just
beyond its termination.

His quotations from Irenaeus,Theophilus of Antioch, Tertui^
lian, Clement of Alexandria, Celsus the opposer of Christianity
fabout 176), and Origen, shew, in a manner past all contra-
aiction, what was thought, said, and written, respecting the
authors of the four Gospels, within the period of 1 60-— 230 or
240. Earlier evidence is produced in the sequeK

29S Oenuineness of the OotptU. [Apbil

In the selection of bis testimony, Mr. Norton is careful and
judicious. He does not^ like even liirdner, bring in every thing
which he can find ; but he appeals to a few direct, plain, une-

3uivocal passages in each writer, which can leave no possible
oubt on the mind what that writer's sentiments were respect-
ing the point in question.

Would that many writers understood the business of selecting
evidence much better than they appear to do ! They are not
contented with the principle, that ^ at the mouth of two or
three witnesses every matter may be established,' but they must
have as many as they can summon, and of all sorts of character.
Especially is this true of the appeals made to the Bible in de-
fence of some particular doctrines. The texts that have once
been adduced as evidence, no matter how unskilfully or how
inconsistently with exegetical principles, are not to be given up,
but always to be brought forward in a contest. Numbers seem
tp be regarded as more formidable than the kind of weapons, or
skill to wield them. And all who from conscientious motives
feel bound to refrain from going to such an extent in the quotar
tion of testimonies, are regarded as secretly cherishing some
heretk^l doubts or difficulties.

I can scarcely imagine any thing better adapted to revolt the
mmd of a simple and candid inquirer, than such a method oF
accumulating testimony. Nor can I conceive how any thing
could be better adapted to gratify a wary opponent. If an ad-
vocate at the bar should summon twenty or thirty witnesses to
prove the signing of a deed, or of a note of band, or to estaUisb
ahnost any other fact, would not the very fact of summoning so
many, strike the jury with suspicion ? And would not his an-
tagonist advocate exult in the opportunity of cross-examining
twenty or thirty witnesses, who would be sure, if adroitly man-
aged, to produce more or less of contradictions that would ren-
der the whole body of testimony suspicious ?

Yet, plain as this matter seems to be, I am constrained to ask :
When will it be understood, that a question in dispute is not to
be decided by the number, but by the weight and quality, of
the witnesses adduced ? Mr. Norton, however, seems well to
understand this matter, for he has conducted bis investigations
with due regard to it ; and he has given much more weight to
his book in consequence of so doin<;.

But it is not the testimony of the authors quoted, which is
the only thing concerned with the question at issue. They

1838.] Oemdnensss of the Oospeli. 9&S

speak not merely for themselves, but for the whole body of
Christiaos at their tune. Mr. Norton has so fine a passage on
this subject, that it must be presented to the reader.

In estimating the weight of evidence, which has thus far been
adduced, for the genuineness of the Gospels, it is important to keep
in mind, what has not always been sufficiently attended to ; that it is
not the testimony of certain individual writers alone, on which we
rely, important as their testimony might be. These writers speak
for a whole community, every member of which had the strongest
reasons for ascertaining the correctness of his faith respecting the
authenticity, and, consequently, the genuineness of the Gospels. We
quote the Christian fathers, not chiefly to prove their individual be-
lief; but in evidence of the belief of the community to which they
belonged. It is not, therefore, the simple testimony of Irenaeus, and
Theophilus, and TertuUian, and Clement, and Origen, which we
bring forward ; it is the testimony of thousands and tens of thousands
of believers, many of whom were as well informed as they were, on
this particular subject, and as capable of making a right judgment.
All these believers were equally ready with thQ writers who have
been quoted, to affirm the authority and genuineness of the Gospels.
The most distinguished Christians of the age, men held in high es-
teem by tbeir contemporaries and successors, assert that the Gospels
were received as genuine throughout the community of which they
were members, and for which they were writing. That the asser-
tion was made by such men, under such circumstances, is sufficient
evidence of its truth. But the proof of the general reception of the
Gospels does not rest upon their assertions only, thougn these can
not be doubted. It is necessarily implied in their statements and
reasonings respecting their religion. It is impossible that they
should have so abundantly quoted the Gospels, as conclusive authori-
ty for their own faith, and that of their fellow Christians, if these
books had not been regarded by Christians as conclusive authority.
We cannot infer more confidently from the sermons of Tillotson and
Clarke, the estimation in which the Gospels were held in their day,
than we may infer from the writers before mentioned, that they were
held in similar estimation during the period when they lived ;
pp. 133 seq.

He then goes on to shew how different this testimony is
from that which is exhibited respecting any other ancient books,
where individuals spoke only their own personal conviction, and
not the sentiments of a whole community ; also that early
Christians had abundant means of determining the question
about the genuineness of the Gospels ; that their moral and
even literary character was much elevated above that of the

S94 Oenmnenea of the Gotpeli. [Apbil

mass of the heathen around them, and therefore they were more
capable than was ordinary of judging in the premises ; while at
the same time we have abundant evidence of their honesty and
integrity. I would commend the whole of this excellent pas-
sage to the attentive perusal and consideration of every candid
reader.

That early Christians did make inquiries respecting subjects
of this nature, seems to be evident from the fact, that while all
the spurious Grospels were rejected, the four canonical ones only
were received. Nay, the matter of investigation went still fur-
ther. Some of the books of the New Testament, viz. the
second epistle of Peter, the second and third of John, Jude,and
in a certain sense the epistle to the Hebrews, and at a later
period the Apocalypse, were called in question by more or less
of the churches, and were reckoned by Eusebius among the
avt$k€/6fi€Po^. While this fact does not decide against the gen-
uineness or authenticity of these books, it still serves to shew
that early Christians were not such stupid and passive recipients
of any and all kinds of writings and reports, as many Neologists
would seem to consider them. At any rate, the books about
which there never seems to have been any dispute in the church
catholic, give us a pure and adequate account of Christianity in
its history and in its precepts. Not that others are superfluous ;
but what I mean is, that if the controverted books were even all
laid aside, Christianity would still be in all substantial respects
what it now is.

Mr. Norton, in order more effectually to remove all the diffi-
culties and objections that lie in the way of the genuineness of
the Gospeb, has examined, in the next place, the theory which
prevailed somewhat extensively before the time of Eichhom, of
the Gospels being derived from one another. Griesbach, for
example, made a vigorous effort to shew, that Mark is the
epitomator of Matthew and Luke ; while others have supposed
that Luke made use of Matthew's Gospel, or Matthew of
Luke's, or that some one of the throe Evangelists copied from
both ' his predecessors. Notwithstanding all the learning and
ingenuity which have been expended on this subject, the diffi-
culties with which it is pressed are overpowering. All the evi*
dence that one Evangelist copied another, or others, lies in the
simple fact of similarity, and sometimes even sameness, of ex-
pression and design, in the difierent Gospels. But while this,
as Mr. Norton has most ably and satisfactorily shewn in his

1888.] Gemdnetien oftlu Oospth. 895

Notes, actually extends to but a very small part of the Gospels,
the dissimilarity, or rather, the peculiar characteristics entirely
appropriate to each writer, extend over far the greater part of
bis work. Thb fact then is utteriy irreconcilable with the
idea of his being a plagiarist, a copyist, or at least a mere para-
phrast. The advocates of such theories seem to hav^ entirely
forgotten, that the discrep€mcieSy or (at any rate) the disnmi'
laritiesy between the Gospels, which in point of number and
importance far exceed the iimUariiieSy are to be accounted for as
well as their near resemblances. Nothing can be further from
giving a probable account of this, than the supposition that any
one Evangelist is a mere imitator, or epitomator (as the phrase
is), of the others.

But Mr. Norton has brought other considerations to bear
upon this subject, and I refer the reader to what he has said on
pp. 15S — 155 of his work. In particular has he discussed the
supposition, that any one of the Gospels was composed after
the apostolic age, in the manner stated above. The estima*
tion in which they were held, did not admit of their being so
changed and remodelled.

The second theory which Mr. Norton examines, is, that the
Gospels were composed from unitten documents existing pre-
viously to their composition. If such were the fact, then these
were either alike or unlike ; if alike how came the authors of
the first three Gospels to differ so much firom each other ? If
unlike, and yet in good repute, as they must have been in order
to be adopted as sources of new Gospels, then how came the
churches to cast away the old Gospels and receive the new
<»ies? These and the like considerations Mr. Norton has
urged in such a way as to render highly improbable the suppo-
sition, that written documents were the sources of our present
Gospels.

A third supposition which he examines, is, that after the age
of the apostles the present Gospels were composed from tradi-
tionary accounts then in circulation among Christians. Had
this been the case, they must have been much more discrepant
than they now are, and doubtless would have been filled, like
the apocryphal Gospels which are still extant, with silly and in-
credible narrations. Besides, Luke expressly states the fact,
in bis preface, that many attempts had already been made, to
compose narrations concerning the things which Jesus said and
did ; so that, whenever his Gospel was written, it is manifest that

296 Oemineness of the QotpiU. {April

oral traditioii was not at that time the only channel in which
the history of Jesus had been conveyed down.

After this discussion, which is ably conducted throughout, the
author comes next to inquire, how the four Gospels cwild first
have gained the currency and authority which they did in the
primitive church, unless they were genuine.

The improbability, I had almost said, the impossibility of this,
is well exhibited in pp. 164 seq. of his work. Such a thing
could not have taken place, during the lives of the apostles, as
the reception of the Gospels attributed to them, unless this was
well-grounded. Their own denial of the fact, would have de-
stroyed the credit of the supposititious books. Let us suppose,
then, that after their death the Gospels first made their appear-
ance, with their present claims as to authorship ; who would
have admitted this claim, in case the books had not before been
beard of? Or did the church expressly agree to authenticate
these works, at a subsequent period ? When and where was
such a thing done, and when and how was it possible, at that
period, that it should be done ?

There is another view of this subject, which is certainly one
of no small importance in the consideration of it. The present
Gospels exhibited, from the first, many apparent discrepancies
with each other. These were not overlooked by early Chris-
tians. In the second century, as we know from abundant testi-
mony, strenuous efforts were made at conciliation. Origen is
very fiiU and ample, soon after the close of thb century, on
the subject of these discrepancies. He even magnifies them
quite beyond the reality, in order that he might urge upon the
churches his favorite method of allegorical interpretation. The
greater the di&rences could be made, the higher the necessity,
as he thought, of adopting hb mode of exegesis.

With these facts in view, how can it well be accounted for,
that the early churches did universally rceieve all four of the
present Gospels ? Had not their genuineness enforced this re-
ception, nothing can be more natund than to suppose, that, like
the Corinthian church in regard to their teachers, one party
would prefer one Gospel and another party would receive
another. Thus endless and wide-spread contest, instead of uni-
versal harmony, would have arisen am6ng the early churches.
This whole subject is amply and ably illustrated in pp. 167 seq.
of out author's work.

Still lDK>ther oonsideratioa be urges upon us. Hie Jewish

1838.] Qemdneness of the OaspeU. B97

and Gentile parts of the Christian church had been much di-
videdy even in the apostolic age, in iiegard to questions about the
reception of the Mosaic law. This and other sources of dissen-
sion^ so common and of so long standing between Jew and Gen-
tile, instead of diminishing among the Palestine Jews, seem to
have been augmented after the destruction of Jerusalem. The
sects of the Ebionites and Nazarenes grew out of the Jewish
party ; and to these the great body of Christians, at a very
early period, became decidedly hostile. How then could the
Gospels, the work of Jeirt , have been forced upon the reception
of the Gentile Christians, after the division between the two
parties became so marked and so permanently established?
Confessedly and plainly the Gospels flowed from a Hebrew
source. If Luke and Mark were not Hebrews, (the probabilitv
is that they were of Hebrew descent, at least in part), still all
antiquity unites in ascribing their Gospels mainly to the influence
of Peter and Paul, and in supposing that these writings under-
went their superintendance or revision. How then could the
Grentile part of the church reject all other Gospels and receive
our present canonical ones, which are of Hebrew origin, if it
were not well and generally known, and believed without any
doubt, that they are genuine ?

Mr. Norton urges these and other questions in a forcible man-
ner, and well adapted to produce conviction. I hope the reader
will not satisfy himself with the brief sketch that I have given
of the nature of his argument, without perusing the original.

In the succeeding paragraph our author has a passage, whkh
the reader will thank me for inserting here.

It is acknowledged that the four Gospels were received with the
greatest respect, as genuine and sacred books, by catholic Christians,
that is, by the great body of Christians, at the end of the second cen-
tury. But earlier than this time, it has been pretended, that we find
no trace of their existence ; and hence it has been inferred that be-
fore this time, they were not in common use and were but little
known, even if extant in their present state. I shall hereafter pro-
duce notices of their existence at a much earlier period. But waving
for the present this consideration, the reasoning appears not a litde
extraordinary. About the end of the second century, the Gospels
were reverenced as sacred books by a community dispersed over the
world, composed of men of different nations and languages. There
were, to say the least, sixty thousand copies of* them in eidstence ;
they were read in the churches of Christians ; they were continually
quoted, and appealed to, as of the highest authority; their repula-

Vol. XI. No. 30. 38

298 Oemdneness of the QoMpeU. [April

don was as woU 'established amoo^ believerB from one end of the
Roman empire to the other, as it is, at the present day, among
Christians in any country. But it is asserted that before that period,
we find no trace of their existence ; and it is, therefore, inferred that
they were not in common use, and but litde known, even if extant
in their present form. This reasoning is of the same kind, as if any
one were to say, that the first mention of Egyptian Thebes is in the
poems of Homer. He, indeed, describes it as 8^ city, which poured
a hundred armies from its hundred gates ; but his is the first mention of
it, and, therefore, we have no reason to suppose, that before his time,
it was a place of any considerable note. The general recepticxi of
the Gospels as books of the highest authori^, at the end of Uie
second century, necessarily implies their celebnty at a much earlier
period, and the long continued operation of causes, sufficient to pro-
duce so remarkable a phenomenon; pp. 177 seq.

Further remarks, expanding, illustrating, and enforcing this
view, are made in the sequel, which well deserve the reader's
attention.

Chap. II. of Part II. is devoted to a discussion of the evidence
respecting the authors of the Gospels, to be derived from the
works of Justin Martyr, who flourished about 140^-160, and
who lived in Palestine, i. e. at Flavia Neapolis in Samaria,
and was a native of that place, although of Gentile extraction.
The question has been strenuously agitated, of late, whether
Justin, who so often and largely quotes evangelical history, has
quoted our present Gospels. The works to which he contin*
ually appeals, he designates by the title of ' /^nofiptjfAOvsvfiaTu
tap ^noatokcDv^ i. e. Memoirs of the Apostles. Into the ex-
amination of this subject Mr. Norton has gone deeply, and with
great patience, and candor, and accuracy, brought out to our
view all the substantial facts which are concerned in making up
a judgment upon the question presented. Not content with the
sixty pages m the body of his work, which are devoted to this
interestmg topic, the author has given us twenty-six more closely
printed ones in his Notes (pp. ccvii. seq.), in which he has pro-
duced a multitude of passages from Justin, in order to illustrate
and fortify his position, viz. that Justin did quote our presetit
Gospels.

I deem his argument to be a triumphant one. It was moreo-
ver specially needed, after the recent and laboui*ed attempt of
Credner, to show' that Justin has quoted a PetrvM GospeljWud
not any of our present canonical ones ; although he is forced to
concede that Justb was not unacquainted with the latter. Long

1888.] Genumeness of the Q<wptU. 999

ago I came to the same conclusion which Mr. Norton has de-
fended, by reading Justin's Dialogue vAth Trypho the Jew.
The discrepancies between his quotations and the passages in
our Gospels which he designs to quote, have been laid hold of
by Credner, and by many others before him, in order to shew
that Justin must have appealed to some work different from our
canonical Gospels. But what is that work ? A Petrine Gos-
pel ; a Gospel according to the Hebrews ; Memoirs of the
Apostles (with this peculiar and appropriate title) ; and other
like works, have been selected by some as the sources of Jus-
tin's quotations. But of all the so named books^ (some of the
names are but imaginary as actual titles), not one remains with
which we can now compare Justin's quotations. How then can
it be ascertained that he quoted from them ?

If it be still urged, that the difference between Justin's quo-
tations and the actual text of our Gospels is so great, that we
muMt suppose him to have quoted some other books; the
answer t» this is, a denial of the fact, and an exhibition of rea-
sons sufficient to constitute a stable ground on which we may
rest this denial. Justin differs no more in his quotations from
the Scriptures, than most of the early fathers do. This I know to
be fact, from repeated examination of several of them in relation to
this same matter. Chapter and verse did not exist, in his days,
in the Mss. of the New Testament. The process of unrolling
a Ms. in order to get at a particular passage so as to copy it
verbatim, was a very tedious one compared with the process of
finding any thing in our present printed volumes. There were
no Concordances of the New Testament in those days. In a
word, a man who was writing with fervour of mind could not,
on any ordinary occasion, stop long enough to hunt out the ex«
act places where particular texts occurred, in the midst of so
many embarrassments which would occasion long delay. We
must add to all this, that in the days of Justin, the memory was
ordinarily trusted to and employed much more than at the pres-
ent time. Hence we see every where, in the early fethers^,
memoriter quotations — a multitude indeed of them which are
most palpably of such a nature, among authors who wrote, as
all acknowleage, after the period when our four canonical Gos-
pels were exclusively and generally admitted by the churches.
On the ground that has served for an attack upon the quotations
of Justin, those of Clemens Romanu8,of Irenaeus, of Tertullian,
of Clemens Alexandrinus and others, might be proscribed.

MO Oenuinentit of the OotpeU, [April

What proves so much, however, does not prove enough for the
purposes of those who would reject the testimony of Justin in
lavour of our present canonical Gospels.

Besides, tliere is one simple test of this whole matter. Justin
has repeatedly quoted the same passages from the Gospels more
than once. Now in doing this, he has varied in the same way
from himself as he has from the originals. This Mr. Norton has
abundantly exhibited, by submitting to our inspection the various
passages of Justin where this is done. The reader will find them
m the Notes, pp. ccxx seq. He will also find passages quo-
ted finom the Old Testament by Matthew, with variations from
the Septuagint version, in quoting which passages again Justin
has followed the peculiarities of Matthew, and not of the original
Greek or Hebrew Scriptures.

If any one doubts, after all, whether there is not some force
in the argument of Credner and others in respect to the dis-
crepance between Justin's quotations and the Gospels, let him
spend a few days in studying the quotations from the Scriptures,
which exist in the works of the eariy Christian writers. 1 might
even say : Let him peruse the New Testament, where he will
find a discrepance between the quotations fix)m the Old Testa-
ment and the originals themselves, whether Greek or Hebrew,
which is not much unlike that exhibited by Justin.

For these reasons I cannot doubt that Mr. Norton is in the
right, in this very important matter ; so clearly in the right, that,
as it seems to my mind, no reasonable objections can be made
against his conclusions.

At all events, the reader cannot fail to perceive, if he atten-
tively peruses the views which Mr. Norton has given us in re-
lation to this subject, that he has bestowed great pains and
labour upon the coi^sideration of it, and that his conclusion is not
to be reiected on the bare ground of hypothesis, or for the sake
of establishing some favorite theory.

In justice to the labour which Mr. Norton has expended on
this subject, I ought to give a passage from him which states
his reasons for it.

The examination of the passages which we have gone over, is of
more interest than may appear at first sight. Justin carries us back
to the age which followed that of the apostles. His writings have
been searched for the purpose of fiinding some notices of Christ, or
acme intimations relating to him, different from the accounlB of the
^EvahgelistB. It will be perceived that nothing which can be regarded

1838.] Genuineness of the Oa^tls. 30i

as of any importaDoe has been discovered. On the contFBiy, he
gives a great part of the history of Christy in perfect harmony with
what is found in the Grospels, sometimes agreeing in words, and
always in meaning. We may infer, therefore, that the account of
Christ, contained in the Gospels, was that which his followers had
taught, and had received, as true, from the beginning ; that it was
the account which Christians acknowledged astl^ foundation of their
faith ; and that there were no opposing narratives respecting him,
which disappeared in part, and m part coalesced into the forms
which the four Gospels present It is remarkable, that in so early a
writer as Justin, we discover so little matter, additional to what is con«
tained in the Gospels ; so little, which it is necessary to suppose de-
rived from any other source. The most satisfactory explanation of
this phenomenon seems to be, that the Gospels had come down from
the apostolic age with such a weight of authority, there was such an
entire reliance upon their credibility, that it was generally felt to be
unwise and unsafe to blend any uncertain accounts with the history
contained ui these works. Such accounts, therefore, were neglected
and foigotten. The Gospels extinguished all feebler lights; pp.
222 seq.

All there is to meet such an array of proof in favour of the
position that Justin quoted our canonical Gospels, is the supposi-
tion that he quoted the Oospel according to the Hebrews or the
Petrine Oospel, as Credner is fond of naming it. But in Jus-
tin's day this Gospel, whatever it was, seems to have existed
only in Hebrew, so far as we can gather from ancient testimo-
ny. Now there is little or no probability that Justin made use
of a Hebrew Gospel. All his quotations of the Old Testament
shew that he used the Septuagint version, and not the Hebrew
Scriptures. And so in respect to the New Testament. He
quotes passages, for example, from Matthew and Luke, where
tnese Evangelists do not agree exactly either with the Septua-
gint or with the original Hebrew, and in these quotations Justin
exhibits the peculiarities of the Evangelists in distinction from
both of the originals. Now, even if we suppose Justin to have
well understood the Hebrew, and to have translated from it in
his Old Testament quotations, how can we suppose, with any
degree of probability, that his translation would minutely aocoid
with the peculiarities of Luke or of Matthew ?

There can be no doubt that Justin, living as he did at Flavia
Neapolis, and surrounded as he was by those who spoke the
later Hebrew, must have had some good understanding of the
conversation-Hebrew of his day. But it would be difficult
indeed, to find in all his works any traces of a literary or critical

302 Oemdneneu of the Ootpeb* [Aprii.

knowledge on his part, of the Hebrew. The instance of his
etymologiziw in regard to the word JSuraPy produced by Mr.
Norton in a rf ote on p. 226, is amusing, and instructive with
respect to the point in question. He says, that JSatdp signifies
apostate, in the language of the Jews and Syrians ; and — ^aV
(the Greek case-ending of the word) means a serpent =^^ ,
(pronounced with a feeble sound of the n, which was often tlie
case with the ancients). Such an etymology he must have
obtained, one would naturally suppose, fiT>m some Jewish Rabbi
who meant to impose upon his credulity. The slightest gram-
matical knowledge of the Hebrew must have taught him that
neither part of such an explanation is correct ; and that the
latter part is even ridiculous.

It is not probable, therefore, that Justin used the Oomel oe-
cording to the Hebrews ; nor even that he used the Hebrew
Gospel of Matthew, if that were indeed extant and in circula-
tion at his time. The proo6 that he used the Gospel of Mat-
thew as it now is, are indeed unanswerable ; for he has copied
some peculiarities of it, which we cannot rationally suppose
would have been adopted by accident.

I am aware that Credner supposes the Petrine Gospel^ which
be thinks was quoted by Justm, to have existed at a very early
period ; and also that the real (jospel of Matthew and this ficti-
tious one, or at any rate the Gospel according to the Hebrews,
were alike as to the peculiarities in question. It b, indeed, a
very convenient and easy way of getting rid of difficulties, when
we are at liberty to imagine any kind of facts which are adapt-
ed to our purpose, and then conclude that they must have ac-
tually existed, because they dispose of our difficulties so happi-
ly. This, at all events, is one of Credner's ways of getting
himself out of trouble. He is undoubtedly a man of great in-
dustry and of much reading, but of a strong bias in favour of
his own theories, and filled to the brim with them. His book
affords much useful material for more sober and judicious writ-
ers, and he is often striking and original in his remarks ; but he
lacks— egregiously lacks— the BedachtsamJceit of such men
as Moms, Emesti, and the younger Tittmann.

It would seem then to be quite probable, if not altogether
certain, from the circumstances above exhibited, that Justin did
not quote the Gospel according to the Hebrews. What then did
he quote ? In answer to this I must present a paragraph from
MrJNorton.

1838.] Genuineness of the Ooepels. 809

• If it be still denied that he used. our present Gospels, then, tn re-
gard to any other single book, which he may be conjectured to have
quoted, it must answer to the following conditions. It must have
been one which he and other Christians believed, or professed to be-
lieve, ^ written by apostles and companions of apostles ;'' it must
^ve been of high authority among Christians, a sacred book, read
m their churches ; and it must, immediately after he wrote, have
fellen into entire neglect and oblivion ; for no mention of it, or allu-
sion to it, is discoverable in any writer who succeeded him. But it
is impossible to believe all these proportions to be true of any book.
Excepting the Gospels, therefore, no history of Christ can be na-
med, or imagined with any probability, which Justin might have
used. The presumption, then, arising from the coincidence of his
quotations with the text of the Gospels, is left to operate with it»
whole force ; pp. 230 seq.

Id the sequel Mr. Norton proceeds to adduce various testi-
monies from Justin, which serve both to show that he quoted
our canonical Gospels, and to confirm the fact that they were
regarded by him as undoubtedly genuine.

In particular should it be noted here, as a fact which is of
much importance, that Eusebius, who quotes so many ecclesi-
astical writers that preceded him, and makes it a point to pro-
duce any thing peculiar or striking in them, although be gives^
a full account (for him) of Justin and his writings, says not a
word of his quoting any spurious Gospels; while at the same
time he tells us, that Hegesippus, the contemporary of Justin, ap*
peals to the Gospel of the Hebrews. It is quite clear, there-
fere, that Eusebius did not consider Justin as making such an
appeal.

when, in addition to all this, we call to mind that Justin
speaks of the books to which be appeals for his evangelical
history, as being counted sacred, as read in the assemblies of
Christians on the Lord's day in connection with the Old Tes-
tament, and other like things, there does not seem to be much
room for even suspicion that Justin did not quote our present
Gospels.

Mr. Norton then sums up his discussion in the following-
manner :

The argument ur^ed in the last chapter is, in its nature, cumula*
tive ; and the accession of force to be derived from the evidence af-
forded by the writings of Justin Martyr is not to be disregarded..
He carries us one step h^^r in our advances toward the apostolic
age* What was before a roattor of inference, it may be thought of

304 Genuineness of the Oospels. [Apbil

necessary inference, becomes a matter of testimony. We leam di»
rectly from his writings, that the Groepels were received by Christians
of his age, that is by those Christians, during the first half of the sec-
ond century, as the authentic and sacred records of the history of
their master, the works of his apostles and their companions.

Finally Mn Norton makes the appeal to the testinoony of
Papias, as recorded by Eusebius, ana to that of Luke himself
as exhibited in Acts 1: 1,2. Papias expressly mentions the
Gospels of Matthew and Mark; and Luke appeals, in the pas*
sage to which reference is made above, to a Gospel that bad
been composed by himself. Thus is testimony carried back
to the very age of the apostles ; and if any credit is due to it,
it is decisive. Can any one produce a good reason why it
should not be credited ?

Mr. Norton does not appeal to the first Epistle of Clemens
Romanus, (to tlie second which is undoubtedly spurious he
could not appeal), nor to the Epistle of Polycarp to the Ephe-
sians, nor to the Shepherd of Hermas, nor to the Epbtles of
Barnabas or Ignatius. The two last of these are of such doubt-
ful authority, that an appeal would be out of place in such a
book as his, unless he bad the intention of collecting together
every thing, whether strong or weak, apposite or inapposite.
As to the Shepherd of Hermas, there is no satisfactory evidence
that it quotes any portion of the Gospels. But in respect to
the Epistles of Clement of Rome and of Polycarp, there is room
to doubt, inasmuch as the genuineness of them in general can-
not be fairly called in question, whether Mr. Norton has judged
well in omitting the evidence from them. He has, indeed, fi;iven
us his reasons for so doing, in ^ VII. p. cclxxxiv. of his Adden-
da. But I am not fully satisfied with them, although I acknow-
ledge that they deserve very serious consideration.

Mr. Norton alleges that the Gospels are not named in these
writings ; and although there are passages in them which acccmi
with some portions of the Gospels, yet they may have sprung
from traditionary reports, and not from written documents.
Consequently, as he thinks, it would only weaken his cause to
rely on arguments which might be of dubious efficacy. Some
one might say, when appeal was made to these writers, that
tbey who lived so near to the aposdes, or rather, who were
<x»itempovary with them, might have drawn their quotations
from other soutxses than those of our canonical Gospels.

This caution on the part of Mr. Norton is certainly mucb

1838.] Oenuintnt$8 of the OospeU. 805

better than the opposite practice of heaping together ail sorts of
testimony, good and bad, and leaving it to the readers to sep-
arate the wheat from the chaff. But I would suggest here,
whether Mr. Norton has fairly been consistent with himself.
Justin Martyr does not name any of our Gospels. He lived,
moreover, so near the time of the apostles, that he must have
been familiarly acquainted with some of their contemporaries,
and liave beard from them many accounts of the apostles'
preaching and conversation. From these he may have quoted
many a passage^ perhaps most passages, which Mr. Norton re-
gards as taken from the Gospels. Yet Mr. Norton, and with
good reason, pleads strongly for the admission of Justin as a
legitimate witness in the cause which he is advocating. So
would I plead for Clement of Rome. There are things, no
doubt, foisted into his Epistle, in some later age ; yet they stand
out as altogether different from the body of his work, and are
as plainly spurious as the three famous passages of a confessedly
spurious origin, which have been foisted into the Gospels, and
which Mr. Norton exhibits on p. xcv. seq. of his Addenda.
But the body of the epistle is of a sober, solid, affectionate
cast, not profound, indeed, but still edifying to the primitive
Christians, and adapted to persuade.

That Clement does not name the books of the New Testap-
nient, is clear enough. But is it not equally so, that he does
not name the books of the Old Testament ? He does, indeed,
call some of the prophets by name, but as individtials he men-
tions their names, not as books. Chapters, verses, titles, i. e.
running titles, I take to be all of modern origin. Certainly the
now usual titles of the Gospels betray an origin quite subse-
quent to the primitive age. EvayytXlov tiata ... is not the
way in which an author would usually, if at all, make out his
own title. It must have arisen from a later Redactor, who,
seeing there were four books that all claimed to be Gospels,
and all of which were acknowledged to be so, distinguished
them by a xoio before the names, which seems to express the
following sense, viz., the Gospel as it is presented or repre--
sented by Matthew, etc. Still, I am aware that the Greek
writers sometimes used xaree before the names of autliors,
yet not simply in the way of designating a mere title ; see
Kuinoel, Comm. Vol. I. Proleg. <^ 2. All things considered,
however, nothing can be more plain to my own mind, than that
the usual running titles of our Gospels were not in the Mss. of

Vol. XI. No. 30. 39

306 Oemdnenea of the Ootpets. [April

Justin's day, nor, of course, in that of Clemens Romanus ; and
this is a sufficient reason why the names of respective Gospeb
are not familiarly appealed to, as in our day.

I will not say, however, that there is as much reason to rely
on Clement as a witness in the case before us, as on Justin ;
because the former lived much nearer the source of authentic
iradUion^ than the latter, and may have oftener appealed to it.
But still, when I compare, as I have done more than once, all
the quotations by Clement from the Old Testament, with those
which he adduces from the New, I can perceive no important
difference in either case as to the modes of quotation, and I am
led to believe, that in general he drew in both cases alike fixxn
written sources. This will not exclude the belief, at the same
time, that now and then a passage occurs, which has come
down, like some of Paul's quotations of the Saviour's words, bv
oral communication. I doubt not that such is the case with
some of Justm's quotations. But why such an advantage should
be taken of this, by Credner, Eichhom, and others, is a differ-
ent question. They doubtless had their reasons for so doing.
But I should deem it to be just as reasonable for me to say,
that in Paul's time there was a Gospel different from our four
in circulation, because he appeals to the words of our Liord,
** It is more blessed to give than to receive,'' as well known and
familiar to the churches, which words are not in any of the ca-
nonical Gospels.

Mr. Norton, then, as it seems to me, might have safely and
soundly admitted the testimony of Clement of Rome, with the
simple abatement to its validity, that it is somewhat more pos-
sible, if not probable, in his case, than in that of Justin Martyr,
that oral tradition might be the source of appeal.

Here ends the text of the first volume or Mr. Norton's im-
portant work. He tells us, (very gladly do we hear it afler
what he has already written), that be shall next examine the
evidence in fiivour of the genuineness of the Gospels, which
may be inferred firom the use of them by the earlier heretical
Meets. I doubt not that much land here remtuns to be possessed ;
and I trust Mr. Norton will give us an accurate and intelligible
survey of it.

Thus much for the text of Mr. Norton's book, including
several of the Notes which could not well be disjoined in our
view of subiects discussed. But his Addenda or Notes com-
prise a much greater body of matter than the text ; for they

1888.] Oenubumu ofth% Chgfeb. 801

take ap 290 pages of small print, while the text occupies only
S48 ot pica type. Some account must therefofe be given of
the Notes ; in regard to which one may truly say, that they are
scarcely of less importance than the text itself. Some of them
are indeed even of a higher cast than any of the text ; for they
comprise the result of more severe, extended, and protracted
efibrt, and of higher intellectual exertion. After saying thus
much, the reader will naturally expect me to Exhibit some ade-
quate reasons for such opinion.

The Notes commence with an examination of Griesbach's
celebrated theorv, respecting the Western, the Alexandrian, and
the Byzantine classes or (as he names them) recentiom of Mss.
It is well known that he considered this theory as fundamental
in judging of the text of the New Testament ; for the goodness
of a reading is not estimated by him according to the number of
Mss., nor yet according to their antiquity merelv, but very much
by the authority of the class or recension to which it belongs.

Griesbach affirms, that these respective classes of Mss. are so
diverse fix)m each other, and eadi so distinctly marked in its
own way, that it is altogether an easy matter at once to sepa-
rate and distinguish them. Of the Western text, as exhibited
in Tertullian and Cyprian, he says that ** it differs toio iuo hab^
iiu universoque colorcy i. e. in its whole costume and entire col-
ouring, from that which was used by Origen."

The fint object of Mr. Norton is, to examine the correctness
of this allegation. After giving a brief but lucid statement of
the principal sources on which Griesbach relies in order to es-
tablish his classification, and of the respective characteristics
which he assigns to each, Mr, Norton proceeds to compare
what this learned critic has said, in different passages ol his
woiks, in relation to more or less Mss. of these classes. The
orgumeTUum ad hamneai has seldom been used with more dex-
terity or to better effect, than Mr. Norton has here employed
it. in a word, he plainly exposes the learned critic to the charge
of frequent and great oversights in relation to this subject, ci
fluctuating opinion, and finally of absolute and downright sel^
contradiction.

Thus much for the consistency of Griesbacb's views. Mr.
Nort(», however, does not stop here. He goes on to show
how difficult,, rather how impossible, it is to establish a theory
like that of Griesbach, from ftict3 as they lie before' us. It b
wonderful, indeed, how widely the views of Griesbach have

308 GenuinenesM of the Gospels. [April

been propagated, in relation to the subject of classifying Mss.
Soon after his theory was broached, an examination of it was
commenced on the part of some. Yet their efforts do not ap-
pear to have been generally recognized. Matthaei attacked
this lusus naturae of criticism very soon after its birth, and dealt
out some rough and heavy bjows which made it stagger.
Eichhom followed up in some good measure and seconded his ef-
forts, to the still farther annoyance of this ill-starred progeny. Dr.
Laurence struck through and through the very vitals of it, and
let out its heart's blood ; (Remarks on the Systemat. Classiff. of
Mss. by Griesbach). Others of less name dug the grave and
decently buried it. But Mr. Norton has disinterred its remains,
burned them to ashes, and scattered these to the four winds
of heaven. May there never arise from them any phoenix-like
yeppfjfia, which shall cost the critical world as much trouble
to hunt it ddwn, as the original monster has done !

No where in his whole work does Mr. Norton appear to more
advantage, than in canvassing the subject before us. In order
that the reader may have a specimen of the nature of the sub-
ject and of the reasoning employed, I must present him with a
passage from Mr. Norton, and from Dr. Laurence as quoted
l3y him.

The quotations of Origen afford, according to Griesbach, the high-
est standard of comparison for the Alexandruie class. But respect-
ing these quotations, Dr. Laurence remarks as follows ; " In order
to ascertain the true character of the readings of Origen, the whole
of them together, and not a partial selection, should be examined.
With this impression, I have given all which a diligent investigation
enabled me to discover, in the IJpistles of St. Paul, and have noted
those which agree with other Alexandrine authorities, or with the
Western, or with both. The total amount of his readings is six
hundred and nine^ out of which there are two hundred and ttoeniy'
six^ which coincide with either Western or Alexandrine authority, or
with both. Of the remainder, many, indeed, not unfrequently ac-
cord with the Byzantine, but many more are perfectly insulated.''
" But, notwithstanding the great amount of this incongruous remain-
der, there are found a sufficient number of fongruous readings for
the purpose, at least, of a comparative examination.''

*' There occur two hundred and Ucenly-six^ which coincide with
one or both of the classes alluded to. Of these, one hundred and
eighteen are supported by Western authority alone, ninety by both
Western and Alexandrine united, and only eighteen by Alexandrine
alone. Supposing the existence of an Alexandrine text, we may

1888.] OenuinenesB of the Oosptb, 309

presume that Origen would frequently have associates of that des-
cription in peculiar readings; but this presumption is far from being
wanranted by fact. For in truth, the very reverse takes place ; as,
out of two hundred and ttDenly-six readings, Origen has but eighteen
distinguishable from the Western text, in which he is joined by any
other Alexandrine Father. Nor even in this limited number of
eiglUeen^ does he read in conjunction with more than one Alexan-
drine, (sometimes with Clemens, and sometimes with Cyril,) except
in the following five instances : Rom. iii. 30 ; 1 Cor. iv. 13 ; viii. 8 ;
Ephes. V. 25 ; Philip, i. 24 ; in which he receives a double support.
On the other hand, his alliance with Western authority, in exclusion
of the Alexandrine, is so intimate, that he reads with that alone, not
eighteen^ but one hundred and eighteen times, a full moiety of the
whole amount. Neither does he here often read with one or two,
but generally (the source indeed being more prolific) with numerous
associates.^'

Besides Origen, Clement of Alexandria is another of Gricsbach's
principal Alexandrine authorities. Of Clement, however, he himself
thus speaks in his last work : " I readily concede, that he often
quoted passages of the New Testament from the Western edition,
and agrees wonderfully {et consentire mirvm in modum) with the
Cambridge manuscript. But he agrees also not unfrequently {non
raro consonat) with mdtnuscripts of the Alexandrine text, the Vati-
can, Ephrem, and Codex Stephani ti ; and this not only in passages
where they give the same reading with the Cambridge manuscript,
but in passages also where the Alexandrine authorities differ from
the Western. "^ It may appear, from all that has been quoted, that
Clement and Oiigen, though put forward as leaders in the cause, are
but doubtful Alexandrines, and well disposed to go over to the ene-
my ; or rather that they are both open traitors. More seriously, it
is evident that there is no ground for distinguLshing under the name
Alexandrine^^ or in any other manner, the text which appears in
their quotations from the text found in certain other authorities call-
ed Western ; pp. xii seq.

The reader needs only to be reminded, in order fully to under-
stand tiie nature of the representation in the last paragraph of
this extract, that the Cambridge Ms. or Codex Bezae is re-
garded as a leading authority in the supposed peculiar readings
of what is called the Western Recension,

I have already quoted so much of Mr. Norton's book as al-
most to expose myself to a legal charge of republication without
the liberty of the author. For the future, therefore, I must re-
trench, however unwillingly I may do it, for the sake of keep-
ing within the more appropriate bounds of a reviewer.

310 Genuineness of the Gospels, [Apul

I may with great propriety add, that I earnestly hope none
of my readers will be content with the meagre account I
have now given of Mr. Norton's masterly Note, on the subject of
Griesbach^s rtcensions. The contradiction of himself by Gries-
bach, his wavering opinions, his repeated modifications, and,
finally his virtual abandonment of his own former system, in his
latest work, i. e. his Commentarius Criiicusy are all exempli-
fied briefly, but plainly and in a most convincing manner.

Hug's recensions^ too, come in, and very deservedly, lor a
part of Mr. Norton's attention. He examines the alleged the-
ory of the recensions of Lucian and Hesychius, and shews how
entirely destitute it *is of any ancient testimony which is at all
adapted to establish it. (n particular, I do not see how Mr.
Norton's construction of the famous passage in Jerome, cited
on p. xxvti., and which has been used for the support of the
above named recensions, can be met and refuted. I cannot en-
tertain a doubt that be has given the proper and the only intel-
ligible construction, which can be put upon the original as it
stands in the text of Jerome.

I can present only a few sentences more firom our author's
Note on the subject of Mss., which will give the reader the gist
of his conclusion.

From what has been said, I think it evident, that the appearances
in our authorities for settling the text of the New Testament afford
no countenance to the theory of recensions, maintained by Gries-
bach and other critics ; that there is no ground for a distinction be-
tween an Alexandrine and a Western text, of which Griesbach re-
presents the difierence as so great, and that the peculiarities of the
Byzantine text may be explained without recourse to the supposition
of a recension. The hypothesis is equally destitute of historical ev-
idence ; yet it is incredible that we should not have found in ancient
authors frequent mention of those supposed recensions, if they had
actually been made. So far from this, however, their existence is
inconsistent with the few notices respecting the history of the text
of the New Testament, contained in the writers of the first four
centuries ; p. xxxii.

Jerome, m the Preface to his lAtin translation of the Gospels,
says that he had corrected the errors before existing in the Latin
copies by comparing together Greek manuscripts, that is, he pro- '
ceeds to say, ancient manuscripts. Not a passage has been pro-
duced from any Christian writer of antiqmty which speaks of a
standard corrected text as of authority ; nothing answering to the
abundant mention in modem writers of the corrected texts of Gries-

1888.] Oenuinenesi of the Gospels. 31 1

bach, Koppe, and others ; nor is there a notice of any collection and
comparison of the various readings of the New Testament, or of any
book of the New Testament.

We may conclude, then, that all our present authorities for set-
tling the text of the New Testament are to be referred to the origi-
nal text, as their nearer or more remote standard, without the inter-
vention of such recensions as have been supposed. This conclusion
is important in regard to the history and cnticism of the text of the
New Testament, and especially as strengthening our confidence,
which the theory of Griesbach is adapted to weaken, m the cenuine-
ness and authority of such a corrected text as we have at me pres-
ent day ample means of forming ; pp. xxxiii seq.

Most sincerely do I hope that this Note of Mr. Norton's will
grow up into a little booky on the highly important subject
which be has here discussed. So much attention to it as be has
already paid, has fitted him for the composition of such a book
as I have named ; in which he should not only dissipate, as he
has here done, the illusions of the dassifiersy but shew howj
why^ and wherein, the various critical editions of the New Tes-
tament already before the public have erred in the estimation of
their authorities, by which they have decided the worth of various
readings. Some sensible and useful hints on this great subject, Mr.
Norton will find to aid him in Schott's Lc^oge, and in the pre-
fiice to his volume of Comm. in Oal. et I. U. TTiess. Such a
volume, conducted in the spirit and with the ability of the Note
that has now been considered, is a desideratum in English sa-
cred literature, and would be one of the most important favors
that Mr. Norton could bestow on the republic of letters.

The third section of Note A. brings before the reader the sub-
ject of the various readings of the Greek text of the New Testa-
ment, considered in relation to their character and importance.

When the critical edition of the New Testament by Mill was
published, it was discovered, that the Mss. which had been com-
pared, afforded about 30,000 variations fifom the Textus Recep*
tuSf i. e. the common or usual text of the Greek Testament.
Since that period, the number of various readings has been greatly
augmented by new comparisons, and amounts, at present, to
more than 100,600.

The subject was in a manner new, when Mill published bis
work, and it took strong hold upon the public feeling. One
portion of the community were struck with horror at the idea
that there were 30,000 variations firom the received text, in

312 Genuineness of the Go^els. [ApRtf.

other authorities which were claimed as of equal or greater
weight than belonged to the Mss. from which the Textus Re-
cepius liad been published. Even Whitby^ enlightened as he
was, and liberal enough, to be sure, in his theological notions,
felt himself impelled by a proper regard to the authority and
credit of the New Testament, to write a book against Mill's vari^
OILS readings ; and from the manner of his book, there can be no
doubt that he thought himself to be * doing God service/ while
performing his task. But, on the other band, skeptks were
filled with exultation, inasmuch as they deemed the credit of
the New Testament writings to be destroyed, by such a num-
berless host of variations and contradictions.

Collins among the infidels, who was by no means an inferior
sort of a man, gave vent to his feelings on this occasion. This
called forth from Richard Bentley his famous Remarks on Free
Thinkings in which is a passage extracted by Mr. Norton, of so
deep an interest and of such great worth, that I should do in-
^justice to my readers, and to the subject and the occasion also,
\ if I omitted the presentation of it.

Mr. Norton remarks, that the number of vario\is readings in
the New Testament is probably less in proportion, than in most
of the classic authors ; which, if it be correct, (and we are going
to see that it is), gives us more confidence in the genuineness of
the New Testament text than in that of the great body of the
classic writers. In justification of this remark Mr. Norton cites
a passage from the book of Bentley that has just been named,
which runs as follows :

" Terence Ls now in one of the best conditions of any of the clas-
sic writers ; the oldest and best copy of him is now in the Vatican
library, which comes nearest to the poet's own hand ; but even that
has hundreds of errors, most of which may be mended out of other
exemplars, that are otherwise more recent and of inferior value. I
myself have collated several, and do affirm that I have §een twenty
thousand various lections in that little author, not near so big as the
whole New Testament ; and am morally sure, that if half the num-
ber of manuscripts were collated for Terence with that niceness
and minuteness which has been used in twice as many for the New
Testament, the number of the variations would amount to above
fifiy thousand.

'^ ]n the manuscripts of the New Testament, the variations have
been noted with a religious, not to say superstitious exactness. Ev-
ery difference in spelling, in the smallest particle or article of speech,
in the very order or collocation of words without real change, has

1838.] Gemifuneis ofth^ Ooipeb. 313

been stiidioTBly registered. Nor has the text only been nuosBcked,
but all the ancient yersions, the Latin yulgate) Italic, Syriac, ^thi-
opic, Arabic, Coptic, Armenian, Gothic, and Saxon ; nor these only,
but all the dispersed citations of the Greek and Latin Fathers in a
course of five hundred years. What wonder then, if with all this
scrupulous search in every hole and comer, the varieties rise to thir-
ty thousand ? when in all ancient books of the same bulk, whereof
the manuscripts are numerous, the variations are as many or more,
and yet no versions to swell the reckoning.

^^ The editors of pro&ne authors do not use to trouble their read*
ers, or risk their own reputation, by an useless list of every small
slip committed by a lazy or ignorant scribe. What is thought com-
mendable in an edition of Scripture, and has the name of fairness
and fidelity, would in them be deemed impertinence and trifling.
Hence the reader not versed in ancient manuscripts is deceived into
an opinion, that there were no more variations in the copies, than
what the editor has communicated. Whereas, if the like scrupu-
lousness was observed in registering the smallest changes in profane
authors, as is allowed, nay required in sacred, the now formidable
number of thirty thousand would appear a very trifle.

'^ It is manifest that books in verse are not near so obnoxious to^
variations as those in prose ; the transcriber, if he is not wholly ig-
norant and stupid, being guided by the measures, and hindered from
such alterations as do not fall in with the laws of numbers. And
yet even in poets the variations are so very many as can hardly be
conceived without use and experience. In the late edition of Tibul-
lus by the learned Mr. Broukhuise, you have a register of various
lections in the close of that book ; where you may see at the first
view that they are as many as the lines. The same is visible in
Plaotus set out by Paraeus. I myself, during my travels, have had
the opportunity to examine several manuscripts of the poet Manilius ;
and can assure you that the variations I have met witn are twioe as
many as all the lines of the book.^' — pp. 93—95, 8th £d.

To take a few books immediately at hand, I perceive by a loose
computation from a table at the end of Wakefield's Lucretius, that
he has collected about twelve thousand various readings of that au-
thor (exclusive of mere diflerences of orthography), from five print-
ed copies only. Weiske^s edition of Longinus presents more
than three thousand various readings of the Treatise on the Sub-
lime, a work of about the length of the Grospel of Mark, collected
from eieht manuscripts and two early editions. And Bekker has
published variatums from his text of the writings contained in his
edition of Plato, which fill seven hundred and seventy-eight crowded
octavo pages, and amount to I know not how many more than sixty
thousand ; the manuscripts used on each of the different writings b^
ing on an average about thirteen. The various readings of the New

Vol. XI. No. 30. 40

314 Genuineness of the Qospek. [Apbii.

Testament, it is to be remembered, have been collected from a. ve-
ry great number of manuscripts of the original^ manuscripts of nu*
merous ancient versions in which it is not to be supposed that the
translator 'always rendered in a manner scrupulously literal, and also
from the citations of a long series of Fathers, who, we know, were
not commonly attentive to verbal accuracy in quoting ; pp. zxxv. seq.

•

This is a long extract, 1 admit, but it would be dealing un-
faithfully with the readers of this Miscellany to omit a passage
of such transcendent practical importance as this. Every man
instinctively feels his faith in the New Testament strengthened,
when he can find assurance, as he does here, that its text has
not been treated with less, but with more, care than that of al-
most any ancient book whatever. For myself I do most sin-
cerely thank Dr. Bentley and Mr. Norton for these excellent
passages.

That part of our public, (and this is by far the greater por-
tion), who have no practical acquaintance with the copying or
1)rinting of books, are hardly able to estimate how numerous the
ittle variations in books will become, unless an extreme care
is taken which the hurry of business will not often permit.
Mr. Norton declares that there is no hazard in saying, that in
our usual version of the Scriptures, there are, in the printed
copies since the first edition in King James's time, variations
which may be reckoned bv tens of thousands ; and if we are to
compare the quotations of the Bible by various writers, as has
been done in respect to the New Testament in order to obtain
various readings, we might safely compute them at hundreds of
thousands. I cannot doubt the correctness of his statement,
after the experience whkh I have had in comparisons of this
nature.

But while this wears a formidable appearance to such as are
not conversant with these matters, it will be found, when tho-
roughly investigated, to be on the whole quite a harmless afiair.
I cannot illustrate and confirm this declaration better than to
quote the words of Mr. Norton.

I proceed then to observe, that, of the various readings of the New
Testament, nineteen out of twenty, at least, are to be dismissed at
once from consideration, — not on account of their intrinsic unimpor-
tance,— ^that is a separate consideration, — ^but because they are found
in so few authorities, and their origin is so easily explained, that no
critic would regard them as having any claim to be inserted in the

1838.] Oemdneneis oftht Oospeli. 315

lest. Of those which lemain a veiy great majority are entirely un-
importtint They consist in di^rent modes of spelling ; in different
tenses of the same verb or different cases of the same noun, not af-
fecting the essential meaning ; in the use of the singular for the plu-
ral, or the plural for the singular, where one or the other expression
is equally suitable ; in the insertion or omission of particles, such as
ojr and d6\ not affecting the sense, or of the article in cases ecjually
unimportant ; in the mtroduction of a proper name, where if not
inserted, the personal pronoun is to be understood, or of some other
word or words expressive of a sense which would be distinctly im-
plied without them ; in the addition of *^ Jesus'^ to ** Christ^' or
'^Christ" to ^^ Jesus'^; in the substitution of one synonymous or
equivalent term for another ; in the transposition of words leaving
their signification the same ; in the use of an uncompounded verb,
or of the same verb compounded with a preposition, the latter difier-
ing from the former only in a shade of meaning ; and in a few short
passages, liable to the suspicion of having been copied into the Gros-
pel where we find them from some other Evangelist Such various
readinjps, and others equally unimportant, compose far the greater
part of all, concerning which there may be or has been a question,
whether they are to be admitted into the text or not, and it is there-
fore obviously of no consequence in which way the question has
been or may be determined ; pp. xxxviii. seq.

Mr. Norton then proceeds to shew in what way we may, al
most with certain success, detect any considerable passages tn
the Textus Receptus which are of spurious origin. Some such
he believes there are. He mentions three which he deems to be
of this character, that have been regarded as having relation to
the doctrine of the Trinity. But of these he particularizes on-
ly 1 John 5:7. I suppose the other two are 1 Tim. 3: 16,
^iog ig^ttviQw^fj N. r. A., ^d Acts 20: 28, ^' Feed the ehurck of
Ood^^ etc., where ^lov is the common reading, and xvylov is
the one more recently preferred by most critics. The first pas-
sage of these three sterns to be plainly destitute of the critical
evidence requisite to establish it ; the second, as Dr. Hender-
son in his E^y upon it has most clearly shewn, has an over-
whelming mass of testimony in its favour ; and the third (^<oii} I
would gladly view as a textus emendoTidus, and cheerfully sub-
stitute nv^lov for ^^ov, inasmuch as at(*a &iov (which the com-
mon reading would imply) is an expression utterly foreign ta
the Bible. A God whose blood was shed, must surely be a
^iog diVTigog as the Arians would have it, and not the impas-
sible and eternal God, which I believe the Logos to he.

316 Genuineness of the OospeU. [Apeil

The value of all the immense labour which has been be-
stowed on tlie lower criticism of the New Testament, is not to
be estimated, then, by any important new light which has
been thrown by it upon the doctrines or facts which pertain to
our holy religion. Not one new doctrine is brought to light ;
not one old one shaken ; and no impoitant fact b varied, or even
obscured, by all that criticism has done. I speak now of what
I believe to have been the actual result of criticism, on stable
grounds of evidence ; not of some results to which some critics
have now and then laid claim. For even Mr. Norton has cut
off from us the two first chapters of Matthew, (not to speak of
other and smaller passages), which certainly would be taking
from the circle of our credence some important, or at any rate
highly interesting, matters of fact. How far he may be deemed
correct in his view of this case, I shall, if providence permit,
endeavour to examine at a future time.

Mr. Norton makes a very brief but judicious summary of
what has been achieved by the labours of lower criticism.

All those [improvements in the New Testament text] of any im-
portance might have been made at a much less cost. Its chief and
great value consists in establishing the fact, that the text of the New
Testament has been transmitted to us with remarkable integrity ;
that far the greater part of the variations among different copies are
of no authority or no importance ; and that it is a matter scarcely
worth consideration, as regards the study of our religion and its his-
tory, whether, after making a very few corrections, we take the Be-
ceived Text formed as it was, or the very best which the most labo-
rious and judicious criticism might produce ; p. xl.

In order to affi>rd the most ample means of satisfaction in
respect to what criticism has achieved, Mr. Norton presents his
readers with a synopsis of all the various readings which Gries-
bach has thought worthy of notice, in the first eight chapters of
Matthew. These are placed in one column, and the received
text in another over against them, so that the eye catches, at a
glance, the whole of the result. It would be out of place to
insert this table here, but the reader will find it in pp. xli — ^xliv.
of Mr. Norton's book ; and he will also find, upon close exami-
nation, that there is scarcely one among the whole of these
readings which is worth a passing notice, excepting perhaps the
St*\n Matt. 3:1, and the omission of the doxology in 6: 13.

The triumphant result, then, of modem critksism with its im-

1838.] Genuineness of tlu Gospeb, 317

ineasuraUe and almost incredible labour^ is, not tiie change of
our text in any important respect, but the settling of the
great question^ whether it needs to be changed^ in the necsa-
Ti¥E ; and in the negative on an immoveable basis. I do not
mean, of course, to assert this of every particle of the Textus
ReceptuSj but to apply it to every thing which it contains that
is of any serious importance. Who, that is of an investigating
temperament, will not thank God and take courage fix>m such a
result as this, after so ^ fiery a trial !'

The next section of Note A. is empbyed in an effort to shew
that Matthew's Gospel was originally written in Hebrew ; al-
though Mr. Norton admits that it must have been very early
translated. The next following section assigns reasons why he
considers Matt, i^ ii. to be supposititious; also Matt. 27: 3 — 10,
and likewise vs. 52, 53. To these he adds Mark 16 : 9 — 20.
Luke 22 : 43, 44. John 5: 3, 4. 8: 3—11. 22: 24, 25.

By far the most important of all these supposed interpolations
is the first, viz. Matt. i. ii. The importance attached to the
position which Mr. Norton has taken in regard to them, renders
It proper that the subject should be discussed at length. A
book so grave and weighty as his, and withal so candid for the
most part and serious too, if it contain important error, should
not be left without at least an attempt to point out that error.
My belief is, that Mr. Norton errs in the position he has taken
as to the original language of Matthew's Gospel, and also as to
the spuriousness of its two first chapters. As he has connected
these two subjects together in his views and reasonings, it seems
to be necessary to examine both of his positions ; which in due
time I would hope to do.

As to the other passages the genuineness of which he calls^
in question, I shall be able to bestow on them only a passing
notice, lest the readers of this work should be wearied with dis-
cussions of this nature. Still, I must enter my protest, at least,
against some of his conclusions, and give some brief reasons for
so doing.

In Note B. Mr. Norton has presented us with the various
readings of Gospels compared by Origen, which readings that
lather recorded. The reader is referred to them, as affording
complete evidence that the text of his day was even more uni-
form than it now is ; and also as an exposition €f facts in respect
to discrepancies among ancient Mss., by which we are to ex«
plain the declarations of Origen, Jerome, and others, about this

390 Oenuineneis of the Gotpelt. [knav

into two portions ; the one oon«stinff of ihat part in whidi the evan*
gelist speaks in hts own person, and the other of words professedly
not his own. Having done this, it appears from the statements be-
fore made, that the same cause could not have operated alone in
both these different portions, to produce coincidence of language.
We cannot explain this phenomenon by the supposition, that the
Gospels were transcribed either one from another, or all from com-
mon documents ; because, if such transcription had been the cause,
it would not have produced results so unequal in the different por-
tions into which the Gospels naturally divide themselves.

But in regard to the words of Jesus, other causes were in opera-
tion, that may account for the verbal coincidences among the evan-
^lists, in their reports of what he said. There was, in tfis case, an
mvariable archetype, to which each writer would endeavour to con-
form himself. Events may be correctly related in many forms of
language different from each other. Words can be repeated with
accuracy only in one form. But each of the first three evangelists
intendea to ^ve the words of his master as they were uttei^ by
him. Nor is it to be supposed, that the evangelist, while writing,
merely recollected those words as having been formerly uttered hy
Jesus, and repeated them for the first time. He had oAen, without
doubt, quoted them in his oral discourses, and heard them quoted by
his fellow-preachers of Christianity. From the nature of the case,
tiiey must, many of tiiem, have become formularies in which tiie
doctrines and precepts of our religion were expressed. The agree-
ment of the fiist three evangelists, in their reports of the woras of
Christ, is no greater than these considerations would lead us to anti-
cipate. There is no ground for any other hypothesis concerning
it ; pp. cii. seq.

In addition to these natural sources of agreement or sameness,
It should be mentioned, that the words of others which are
cited, as well as those of the Saviour ; and in like manner all
the quotations from the Septuagint Version of the Old Testa-
ment ; would of course fall under the same general category.
The cases where the quotations of the Evangelists differ from
the Septuagint text, and yet agree with each other, Mr. Norton
▼ery naturally solves by the supposition, (which we know must
in many cases have been matter of fact), that the Septuagint
text of the Evangelists' day differed in many places from that
in our present copies.

Mr. Norton observes, in the next place, that the coincidences
of the Gospels as to diction, '' does not lie together in masses."
They are almost every where confined to clauses merely, or
fragments of sentences ; rarely do they make up, without in-

1838.] Oenidneness of the Oospels. 3S1

temipUon, eveo a single verse at a time. la order to exem-
plify this, he presents, in the way of comparison, the account
given by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, of the cure of the para-
lytic at Capernaum ; which is a fair specimen of what is com-
mon to many paragraphs of the first three Gospels. The mi-
nute discrepancies which every where appear, even in such ac-
counts as this, shew something different in each case from the
hand of a mere copyist or redactor.

The discrepancies in chronology, or, to speak more accu-
rately, the discrepancies as to series or order of events^ in the
different Gospels, have fix>m the most ancient times attracted
the notice of all critical readers. It is well known that Mark
and Luke depart from the order of Matthew in a number of
somewhat important cases ; moreover, that although they agree
more nearly with each other than they do with Matthew, in
regard to the general order of events, yet in several cases even
Mark and Luke are quite discrepant from each other.

These differences Mr. Norton has brought fully into view ;
and be insists that these, as well as the other phenomena of
the Gospels, ought to be accounted for by the theories that
have lately been proffered to the notice of the public, before we
can adopt those theories as probable.

He then proceeds to examine the supposition, that two of
the Evangelists copied, the one from his predecessor, and the
other from both his predecessors. For example ;. we may sup-
pose that Luke first copied from Matthew, and then Mark cop-
ied from both Matthew and. Luke. Now the points of disa-
greement between Matthew and Luke are so many, both as to
matter, manner, order, and idiom, that any thing like copying
on the part of Luke, in the common sense of that word, is quite
out of question. Then in the next place, Mark differs so wide-
ly from both the others, in regard to compass and kinds of
matter, manner, order, etc., that no tolerable probability can be
made out of his having been a copyist ; nor, indeed, in case he
had been, can we assign any credible motive for undertaking
his performance.

By considerations such as these, and allied to these, Mr.
Norton tries and examines the various theories which maintain
that the Evangelists were copyists of each other ; some copy-
ists in this way, and some in that, for there is no one of the
three Evangelists in question, who has not been placed first in
order by some of the critics. To all such as have been per-
VoL. IX. No. 30. 41

322 Oenuineness of the Gospeb. [April

piexed by the theories on the subject of the formation of the
Gospels, which critics have lately excogitated ; to all who wish
to see how easy it is to impose upon one's self, and on the pub-
lic too, by publishing one-sided and partial views of any mat-
ter ; I would most sincerely commend the diligent perusal of
what Mr. Norton lias written on this subject. The conviction
which I have long had, that the whole affair is only " castle-
building in the air," has been greatly heightened by reading Mr.
Norton.

But while the theory, which maintained that one Evangelist
copied from another or others, has of late been gradually and
almost silently going into desuetude on account of the internal
and insuperable difficulties which it presents, the newer and
more fashionable one of a ProtevangeKuniy which Eichhomand
Marsh have decked out in so many gaudy colours, has been
wide spread on the continent, as I have before remarked.
Eichhom was not indeed the father, but only the nurse, of this
unlucky progeny. Semler I take to be its progenitor ; Lessing,
Niemeyer, Halfeld, and Paulus, its Lucinas ; Eichhorn its
prime-nurse. Marsh its god-father, and Ziegler, Gratz,'Bert-
holdt, Weber, and Kuinoel, its foster-fathers.

But with all the nursing and care bestowed upon it, it has
proved to be but a sickly child. It was bom with the seeds of
phthisis in its constitution ; and although for a while its ruddy
race appeared to indicate, in early youth, some symptoms of a
vigorous state, yet it soon began to grow pale and sickly. It
has recently been fast approaching the last stages of disease ;
and now Mr. Norton has administered a dose which will pre*
cipitate its death. If not, then my prognosis is not secundum
artem.

I will not repeat here the account which is briefly given on p.
289 seq. above. Mr. Norton will present the reader with a more
full and minute detail respecting the documents supposed to be
employed by the Evangelists, on pp. cxxxiii. seq. of Addenda.
The recapitulation of this, by Mr. Norton himself, may however
be presented to help the reader on this occasion to a right view
of the subject.

I will briefly recapitulate the steps in this hypothesis. The first
supposition is of an Original Gospel, written in Hebrew, and receiv-
ing continual additions from various hands. This is supposed to
have been used in three different forms by the first three evange-
lists, being in one of its forms, the basis of the woric of each. Be-

1838.] Genuineness of the Oaspels. 323

sides this document, it is supposed, that there was another, a mis-
cellaneous collection of discourses and sayings of Jesus, likewise
written in Hebrew, which was used only by Matthew and Luke.
Thus, the genuine correspondence of matter and language^ among all
three evangelists, and between any two of the evangelists in portions
peculiar to them, is thought to be accounted for. The verbal coin"
cidences between Mark and Luke are explained by the supposition,
that they both used a Greek translation of the Original Gospel, made
before diat work had received any additions ; and the verbal coin-
cidences between our present Greek Grospel of Matthew and the
other two Gospels, by the supposition, that nis translator used their
Gospels in rendering into Greek the Hebrew original of Matthew ;
p. czzzvi.

On the supposed Protevangelium or Original Gospel thus
proffered to the notice of the critical world, Mr. Norton pro-
ceeds to make some judicious and common-sense remarks. Very
plain and striking is it, as he shews, that if such an Original
Gospel did exist in early ages, it must have been regarded as a
work of great importance and of very iiigh credit. Otherwise,
how is it rational to suppose, that the Evangelists all chose it
as the basis of their respective works ?

Copies, moreover, of such a work must have been widely
circulated, and have of course been in the hands of many Chris-
tians in di&rent regions and countries. How then comes it
about, that no ancient ivriter ever once makes mention of any
such Protevangelium 1 The fact cannot be disputed.
There is not a solitary hint of any such thing in all Christian
antiquity. Yet we have often repeated mention of any and all
kinds of apocryphal writings, even the most contemptible and
insignificant. But the book of books — the great legitimate
source of our canonical Gospels — the spring from which all
these streams Issued — ^is not even once named among such wri-
ters as Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Origen,
or any of their followers !

The whole a&ir, then, is upon the very face of it an incredi-
ble thing. And still more difficult than even the matter above,
is the faot that no copy of such an authentic and important
work as the Protevangelium, has ever been preserved. Origen,
the great investigator of all ancient Mss., never, in all his trav-
els, lighted upon such a treasure as this.

Facts such as these give a death-blow to all the claims which
can be urged, in fevour of such a work. Mr. Norton has not
failed to urge these, and to set the whole matter in its proper light.

324 Genuineness of the Oospeb. [April

Other considerations, and weighty and conclusive ones too,
Mr. Norton urges against the claims that have been made in
favour of a Protevangelium. It could not have been tampered
with, considering its weight &nd authenticity, in such a manner
as Eichhorn and Marsh suppose. Such a process was contrary
to all preconceived notions and ordinary habits of tlie Jews, in
respect to writings deemed sacred. Matthew, in particular,
having been an original eye-witness of the public life of Jesus,
did not need any such additions as were made to the Protevan-
gelium, nor indeed the work itself, to give him information.
Luke and Mark had a more certain source to which they could
appeal, than an interpolated document which had gone through
alterations by all sorts of hands. Luke's own testimony, in the
Preface to his Gospel, is directly in the face of such a supposi-
tion ; for there he states, not his de])endence on written docu-
ments, but the contrary. Nothing like the embodying of an
Original Gospel in their productions, can be found in the Gos-
pels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke ; nor do these Gospels enable
any one at all, as Eichhorn affirms they do, to separate what
was originally selected and what was adjectitious. The varia-
tions— unimportant variations — of the Evangelists from each
other, in cases where the matter and expression in various re-
spects correspond, cannot be accounted for on any rational
ground, if we suppose them to have copied an Original Gospel.
Such variations exhibit no appearance of being designed emen--
dations ; and if they are not so, how came they to be made ?
Moreover, the appropriate uniformity of style in each of the
different Gospels shews that they are not compiled from a work,
which had already been altered some five or six times (as Eich-
horn and Marsh would lead us to suppose) before it came into
their hands.

I hope Mr. Norton will be ready, when we come to the ex-
amination of his theory about the spuriousness of Matt. i. ii. and
his belief in a Hebrew original of Matthew, to recognize what
he has here so well and truly said, of the individual and consis-
tent character, " the well defined features," of Matthew's Gos-
pel. I fully accord with what is here said ; and have only to
ask that neither he nor my readers may suflfer it to pass from
their recollection.

Although I have made out a short summary, and a very
brief one it is, of Mr. Norton's arguments against the supposi-
lioo of a Protevangelium, yet, that the reader may be led still

1838.] Genuineness of the Gospels. 325

better to comprehetid this subject, I will present him with a re-
capitulation made by Mr. Norton himself, near the close of his
argameots.

Notwithstanding, therefore, the ingenuity and labor with which
the hypothesis in question has been defended, I believe the objec-
tions to which it is exposed, occur, in a more or less definite form,
to almost every one who has examined it. It supposes an Original
Gospel, sanctioned by the apostles ; yet, had such a work existed,.
we cannot believe, that, even if the Hebrew original had perished,,
its Greek translation would have been lost, and no memory of the
book remain. It supposes this book to have been treated in a man-
ner without parallel in literary history, and wholly inconsistent with
the authority which must have been ascribed to it. It implies a so-
licitude about the finishing and refashioning of writings, equally in-
consistent with the character and habits of the Jews of Palestine. It
requires us to believe, that the evangelists copied into their histories
the collections of anonymous individuals ; when one of them was an
eyewitness of the events which he related, and the other two were
in habits of continual intercourse with those, who, like him, were
the primary sources of information respecting the history of Jesus,,
and the business of whose lives it was to afford this information to
others. It is inconsistent with the account which St. Luke gives of
the manner in which he procured the materials for his Grospel, and
with the historical notices which we have of the composition of the
other Gospels of Matthew and Mark, notices, which, so far as they
represent these Grospels as containing what the apostles had before
delivered orally, are confirmed by their intrinsic probability. And
it fails of its proposed object. It does not explain the phenomena of
the agreement and disagreement of the first three Grospels ; but, on
the other hand, is irreconcilable with the appearances those Grospels
present For it supposes, that an original document was so used as
the basis of the first three Gospels, that it is still preserved in each ;
while, in fact, no such document can be discovered. On the con-
trary, in the unsuccessful attempts^ade to restore this document, it
becomes necessary to represent it as so brief, defective, and unsatis-
factory, tliat we cannot believe such a work to have existed, because
we can discern no purpose for which it could have been intended.
The hypothesb implies, that the correspondences of the three Gos-
pels may be separated from their differences 'by a sort of mechani-
cal process, so that the former may af\erward be brought together
and form a connected whole ; while, in fact, the one and the other
are blended so intimately, as continually to appear together in the
same narrative. In attempting to account for the correspondences of
these books with each other, it presents a solution which requires
much more correspondence than exists. And« in the last place, the

326 GenuincTiess of the Gospels. [Apkii^

number of writers whom it represents as contributing materials for
the Grospels, is irreconcilable with the individuality of character evi-
dent in each of them ; pp. clix. seq.

Mr. Norton next proceeds to shew^ that there is another
and more satisfactory method of accounting for the coinciden-
ces of the three first Gospels. In substance this is given on
p. 289 seq. above. The amount of it is, that the events of Je-
sus's life and his sayingd were so deeply impressed on the minds
of multitudes, that they needed no writings at first, in order to
recal them to memory. But when a new generation came to
spring up, who had not witnessed these things, the danger of
forgetting them, and of varying the narrations respecting them,
became more and more apparent. There were, however,
many original witnesses still living, when the Gospels were
written. The preachers of the Gospel had often, and in each
other's presence, given accounts of many important facts and
sayings of Jesus. On all sides, the essential features in nar-
rations of this sort were preserved, and were apparent ; while
some individuality would also of course appear, in the different
modes of expression adopted by different narrators.

A single passage from Mr. Norton here, will illustrate and
expand this view.

We conclude, then, that portions of the bistoiy of Jesus, longer or
shorter, were of\en related by the apostles ; and it is evident, that
the narrative at each repetition by the same individual, would become
more fixed in its form, so as soon to be repeated by him with the
same circumstances and the same turns of expression. Especially,
would no one vary from himself in reporting the words of his Mas-
ter. We have next to consider, that the apostles, generally, would
adopt a uniform mode of relating the same events. The twelve
apostles, who were companions of our Saviour, resided together at
Jerusalem, we know not for how long a period, certainly for several
years ; acting and preaching in concert. This being the case, they
would confer together continually ; they would be present at eacn
other^s discourses, in which the events of their Master's life were re*
lated ; they would, in common, give instruction respecting his histo-
ry and doctrine to new converts, especially to those who were to go
forth as missionaries. From all these circumstances, their modes of
narrating the same events would become assimilated to each other.
Particularly would their language be the same, or nearly the same,
in quoting and applying passages of the Old Testament as propheti-
cal ; and in reciting the words of Jesus, whose very expressions
they must have been desirous of retaining. But the verbal agree-

1838.] Oenuineness of the Oospels. 337

ment between the fiist three Grospels is found, as we have seen,
principally where the evangelists record words spoken by Christ or
by others, or allege passages from the Old Testament Elsewhere
there is of^en much resemblance of conception and expression, but,
comparatively, much less verbal coincidence ; pp. clxvi. seq.

Mr. Norton, in mentioning that the instruction of the Rabbies
was given orally and retained by memory, and thus showing
that the Jews were accustomed to the exercise of their memo-
ries in the way of preserving what their teachers inculcated, has
not urged the subject, as it seems to me, so far as he might and
should have done. He does not mention that the whole copy
of the oral law of the Jews, which they call Mishna (i. e. the
iteration) was brought down memoriter to the time of the Rabbi
Joseph Hakkodesh, i. e. to more than a century after the birth
of Christ. There cannot be a question that many of the rites
and maxims of the Pharisees, adverted to in the Gospels, are
embodied in the Mishna. The book itself begins with the de-
claration, that the contents of it were delivered orally to Moses
on Mount Sinai ; then by him to the Seventy Elders ; by these
to heads of divisions and families ; by them to the mass of the
people ; and so in succession down to the time when Rabbi Ju-
dab committed the whole to writing. I do not cite this story
because I believe in it ; but I cite it to shew, that the Mishna
must have been quite an ancient tradition, in order to render it
possible for a writer to palm off such a story upon the Jewish
nation ; and that, at all events, the extraordinary retention in a
mere memoriter way of the whole of the Mishna for a long time^
shews to what extent such matters were carried among the
Jews.

All the Eastern world exhibits the like phenomena. Let
the reader call to mind the rhapsodists in hither Asia who so
long preserved Homer, while they sung him ; or the innumera-
ble story-tellers of the East, who will entertain their employers,
by reciting memoriter many more narrations than the TTiousand
and One contains. Among all nations, m earlier ages, such
practices existed to a wide extent, where there was any cultiva-
tion of mind.

There is nothing strange then in the fact, that those who sat
daily at the feet of Jesus for more than three years, should have
remembered to a wide extent his sayings and doings ; nothing
strange in the fact, that when they reduced the account of these
things to writing, there should have been so many striking coin-

328 Genuineness of the Oospek. [Apbil

cidences between different writings. Yet, with all these coinci-
dences, it is perfectly natural to suppose, that there must have
been peculiarities appropriate to each individual Evangelist, as
to his mode of viewing each subject, his method of stating it, and
the extent of what was comprised in his account. Such is the
fact beyond all doubt. On the ground that inspiration is fully
credited in each case, this would make no important difference
in respect to diversities. The Greek and Roman writers do
not exhibit more striking discrepancies of style and modes of re-
presentation, than those which are apparent in both the Old
Testament and the New.

Mr. Norton endeavours, on p. cclxx. seq., to account for the
occasional verbal agreement between Mark and Luke, by the
supposition that the Gospel was more usually preached in the
Greek language, particularly at Jerusalem, where was always a
concourse of foreign Jews, who spoke that language and proba-
bly would not have well understood the Hebrew. The words
-of the. Saviour being often stated in the Greek language, would
be remembered by those who often heard them, and repeated
in like manner, in many respects, by those from whom Mark
and Luke obtained information.

But here a difficulty occurs in regard to the occasional 5onte-
ness of Matthew's Gospel also. Mr. Norton, as we have seen,
supposes this to have been originally written in Hebrew. The
translator of this Hebrew to Greek, then, as he here maintains,
when he came to passages parallel in sentiment with some pas-
sages in Mark and Luke, instead of making a simple and direct
version of his original, expressed the sentiment oi it in the lan-
guage of one or both of the two latter Evangelists. Of course,
he supposes the translator to have had the Gospels of Mark and
Luke before him.

There is another point in respect to thb similarity, which
must be exhibited in Mr. Norton's own language, in order to do
justice to him.

But theie is, further, a remaikable phenomenon in the verbal co-
incidences between the Greek Gospel of Matthew and the Gospels
of Mark and Luke, which shows that the translator of Matthew used
those Gospels in a particular manner. Throughout the matter com-
mon to (dl three Gospels^ his rendering is, witii veiy trifling excep-
tions, never coincident with the words of Luke, except in passages
where there was a previous verbal coincidence between Luke and
Mark ; while in the matter common only to Matthew and Luke, he

1838.] Oenuineness of the Oaspels. 5229

Qften adopts the words of the latter. The obvious sc^ution of this
fact is, that the translator, in his renderings, did not rely merely up-
on his general recollection of the phraseology of Mark and Luke,
but wrote with their Gospels open before him ; and that, finding the
correspondence between the language of his original and that of
Mark much sreater than between it and that of Luke, he used the
Gospel of ^&rk alone so far as it contained the same matter, and
had recourse to that of Luke only when Mark failed him. Thus, in
the matter common to all three, he agrees with Luke only acciden-
tally, that is, where there was a previous agreement between Luke
and Mark; pp. clxxii. seq.

In the next paragraph he states, that on the supposition that
Matthew wrote originally in Hebrew, the verbal agreement of
bis Greek Gospel can be accounted for in no other way than
this. A more important conclusion still he deduces from
the alleged coincidence of agreement with Luke as stated above,
where the latter agrees with Mark in cases of matter common
to both — the conclusion namely, that Matthew's Gospel must
have been originally written in Hebrew, because such a phenom-
enon in respect to coincidence can be accounted for in no other
way, than by supposing it to have been occasioned by the man-
ner in which the translator performed his work. Where Mark
and Luke exhibit the same matter, the translator of Matthew,
it is assumed, followed Mark ; and the coincidence of Luke in
such a c^e is accidental, or (in other words) springs merely
from his having accorded with Mark in his expressions. Of
coarse, then, where Luke differs from Mark, there the transla-
tor of Matthew follows the latter, and consequently disagrees
with Luke; but where Luke and Matthew alone exhibit narra-
tions of any particular thing, there the translator of Matthew re-
sorted to Luke as his model, and there the resemblance between
them is striking.

Mr. Norton thinks that this discovery of the manner in which
Matthew harmonizes with Mark, in the way of preference to
Luke, and then with Luke where Mark fails him, is ^^ one of
the most important of all the explanations that have been given
of the phenomena of the correspondencies among the Gospels."
He deems it due, therefore, to Bishop Marsh, to acknowledge
him as the author of this discovery, lest he should be thought to
arrogate to himself the credit arising from so important a dis-
covery, which is due to the Bishop.

It seems not a little strange however to me, that Mr. Norton,

Vol. XL No. 30. 42

390 Genuineness of the Gaspeb. [Aprii*

who has been so keeD-sighted in spying out the faults and enors
of the wonderful conceit about an Origifiol GojpeZ, as the grand
menstruum by which all difficulties were to be solved, should
have given so easy credence to the Bishop of Peterborough in
the present case. I can explain it only by the supposition, that
be saw in this theory, as he says, a conclusive reason in favour
of an original Hebrew Gospel, and then found decisive evidences
of the work of a translator and of the manner of that work.

1 should begin the examination of this theor}', in case I felt at
liberty now to go fully into it, by a denial of the main hciy viz.,
that in cases where all three of the Evangelists relate the same
occurrence and Luke differs from Matthew, Matthew, i. e. the
translator of Matthew, attaches himself to Mark and agrees with
him. Nothing is like facts in such a case ; but to them I must
briefly refer the reader, not thinking it meet here to produce the
Greek originals at full length. I refer him, however, to the
pages in Newcome's Greek Harmony, the second edition re-
cently published, where these originals are spread out to his e3re,
and be can instantly determine whether my statement is correct.

Compare then, (1) Matt. 17: 18 with the latter part of
Luke 9: 42 and Mark 9: 25. (Harm. p. 105.)

Here Matthew, although discrepant in some respects firom
both of the other Evangelists, is plainly much nearer in matter
and manner to Luke than he is to Mark.

(2) Matt. 17: S2 with Mark 9: 31 and Luke 9: 44. (Harm,
p. 106.)

Here Luke and Matthew exhibit fiiXXu nagadiioa-&ah while
Mark has simply nagadldotai.

(3) Matt. 22: 27 with Mark 12: 22 and Luke 20:32.
(Harm. p. 156.)

In this case Matthew and Luke exhibit vartgov ii nurtav^
while Mark has iaxatt] navtotv,

(4) Matt. 26: 16 with Mark 14: 11 and Luke 22: 6. (Harm,
p. 172.)

Here Matthew and Luke have iU^H tunatglop ; while Mark
says : fCv^ti nmg tvxalgatQ.

(5) Matt. 27: 59 with Mark 15: 46 and Luke 23: 53.
(Harm. p. 207.)

Here Matthew and Luke : iv^tvXipp avEO (sc. a£fia Vi^oov)
cwdovk; while Mark says : IvtlXfjoi r^ a$vd6vi.

(6) Matt. 28 : 6 with Mark 16: 6 and Luke 24 : 6. (Harm,
p. 210.)

1838.] Gtnmneneu of the Oospeb. 331

Here Matthew and Luke say : Ov% fatip £de^ ny^Q^n y^Qf
(Luke, aU' nyh^n) * while Mark says : vy*g^n» ovx loiiv idi.

These examples of discrepancy I have ttJcen from De Wette's
Introduction to the New Testament, ^ 80, Note a. With this
meagre list he seems to rest satisfied, in opposing the view of
Bishop Marsh, which is presented above and which is so much
applauded by Mr. Norton. My first impression on examining
this list was, that it must be a rare case indeed in which Mat*
tbew could be found to agree with the diction of Luke, while
the example of Mark was also before him. So at least De
Wette would seem to have thought, when be gave to his read-
ers such a list of coincidences with Matthew, seemingly the re-
sult of comparison throughout the parallel passages of the three
first Gospels. The list is introduced into the midst of statements
that wear an imposing appearance of great labour and diligence,
in the examination of all the coincidences and discrepancies of
the Gospels.

But I had learned, many years since, to believe that De
Wette, with all his talent and learning (and he has much of
both), is a very hasty, and not unfrequently a very inaccurate
writer, and is not always to be depended on where long continued
and patient research must be made. It was' a matter of course,
therefore, for me to resort to the Greek Harmony, and there, to
my surprise, after reading such statements in Bishop Marsh,
Mr. Norton, and De Wette, I found, without any pains-taking,
in every section which I investigated merely as it occurred on
opening the book, facts which shew how utterly groundless this
great discovery of my Lord of Peterborough is. Will the read-
er have patience while I present him with a few examples of
what a few hours' diligent research brought under my notice ?
The point to be settled here, (and this is my apology for dwell-
ing upon it), is of more importance than every one at first view
w3l be ready to suppose.

In the very first instance of triplex harmony that occurs in
the Gospels, there are some striking discrepancies in the mode
of narration, in which Matthew follows^ (if I may be allowed
thb word merely for brevity's sake, for I hold Matthew to have
been entirely an original writer), Luke instead of Mark.

(a) Compare Matt. 3: 3 with Mark 1: 2, 3 and Luke 3: 4«
(Harm. p. 12.)

Here, after the words Isaiah the praphety common to all
three of the Evangelists, Matthew and Luke use yyorrog, and

33S GenuinenesB of the GospeU. [April

then quote a passage from the Old Testament, as it stands in
the Septuagint (Is. 40: 3), with the exception that instead of
tov Otov lifAciif there at the close, the two Evangelists both
read avioS. But here Mark, after the words Isaiah the pro^
phet, inserts a passage from Malachi 3: I, and then proceeds
with the quotation from Isaiah, as in the other Evangelists.
Moreover be omits the word Xtryot^tog, and in its stead employs
yf^ganrai,

(b) Matt. 3: II, compare with IMark 1 : 7, 8 and Luke 3: 16.
(Harm. p. 13.)

Here Matthew and Luke employ ^antl^oi ; but Mark has
ifianitoi, Matthew and Luke say, avrog vftag pantiasi h
nvevfittti ayica xai nvgl; but Mark says, avrog Si fiunriaH v^ig
iv nPtvfiUTi dyio), differing in some respects as to manner, order,
and matter.

(c) Matt. 9: 5 with Mark 2: 9 and Luke 5: 23. (Harm;
p. 32.)

Here, after W . . . ivxondu^ov ; tlnuv ' Matthew and Luke
immediately subjoin : aftmptai aov (aoi) ai afiagtiai; ij nnttw
"JSynpai »at nigmaw ; but Mark inserts teji 7io^aAi;rix(^ after
the first (iniiv, and for the last phrase he hzs^Eytigif igop aov
top Hgipfiatopf Hal nfgmaru ;

(d) Matt. 12: 1 with Mark 2: 23 and Luke 6: I. (Ham*
p. 36.)

Matthew says, ol fia^n^al . . . tiglapto rlXXnv oraxvmg jeof
ia&Uv; Luke, eitXXop .... tovg ataxvag, xal ^a-d-pop; while
Mark says, tjp^aPTO ol fAaOtitat avzovidop noulp xikloptf^ tovQ
oxaxvag, wholly omitting ijaOiov,

And again in the next succeeding verses, Matthew and Luke^
0 ovH i^eati noulv ip aa/?/?arq) («V zo7g aafifiaaij, while Mark
has ti noiovatp ip roTg adfifiaaip o ovx t^toti.

(e) Matt. 12 : 4 ^ith Mark 2 : 26 and Luke 6 : 4. (Harm.
P-^'T.)

Here Matthew and Luke, tiaijX^fv ng tov ohop tov &sov,
nal toifg Sgtovg Tfjg ngo^f'afmg tifayev {fkapi) ; but Mark inserts
after ^iov the words iul *^fiia&ap tov aQxngioig,

(/) Matt. 12: 13 with Mark 3: 5 and Luke 6: 10. (Harm,
p. 38.)

Rejecting the evidently spurious readings here, Matthew
savs, Hal dnoxateata&tj vyttjg dg i] akktj, but Luke adds fj Xiig
ewtov after dnouatwrdt^fi and omits vyi^g (according to the

1888.] Gemnnenea ofth€ Goipeb. 333

corrected text) ; while Mark simply says, inonauata^fi 19 x^ig
avtov^ omitting wholly the o!^ 9/ alXti,

(g) Matt. 12: 25 with Mark 3: 24 and Luke 11: 17. (Harm,
p. 53.)

Matthew and Luke, niaa fiaoilila [div] fug&aOilaa . . . i^^ti"
fiovtaii but Mark, iw fiaaUiia . • . fugioi^^ ov dwutmi ata-

(A) Matt. 13 : 8 with Mark 4 : 7 and Luke 8 : 7. (Harm,
p. 62.)

Matthew and Luke, ujunviiop ; Mark, avpinp^iai^.

(i) Matt. 13: 10 with Mark 4: 10 and Luke 8: 9. (Harm,
p. 62.)

Matthew and Luke, ol fiadtixal\ Mark, ol mgl uiiow.

(j) Matt. 19: 21 with Mark 10: 21 and Luke 18: 22. (Harm,
p. 137.)

Here Matthew and Luke, aaokovdei fio$ jc. r. A. ; while
Mark adds to this, agas roV otavgow^ and then proceeds like the
othecs.

{Ic) Matt. 21: 23 with Mark 11: 28 and Luke 20: 2. (Harm,
p. 150.^

Matthew and Luke, ttiv i^ovoUv taixnv ». '• A. ; Mark
adds ipa twta noi^g, and then proceeds as the others. In
the next verses Matthew and Luke have igtatiiawf and Mark
in$gtotiicm,

(/) Matt. 24: 7 with Mark 13: 8 and Luke 21: 11. (Harm,
p. 163.)

Matthew and Luke, fooviM kifiol %al Xoiftoi ; Mark, ltf*ol
KAJ zctgaxaL

(m) Matt. 24 : 29 with Mark 13 : 25 and Luke 21 : 86.
(Harm. p. 165.)

Matthew and Luke,ai dvmfAi$g tatpovgapoivaiikiv^iiaowtai;
Mark, ai dvyaiuig ai iw rolg ovgavotg aaktvOijooviat,

But I withheld my hand. I have a number of other exam-
ples marked, the fruit of a few hours search, and of a like tenor
with those produced above.

It is in vain for Mr. Norton to allege, in reply to these in-
stances, that they are of little consequence as to the •seme. I
admit this most fully ; and I must admit it, and so must he, in
other innumerable cases of discrepancy as to diction between
the di&rent Evangelists. But the simple question b, whether,
in case of coincidence as to matter between the first three Gotr
pels, Matthew has alwayi conformed to the diction of Maifc ia

334 Oetmtneneu of the Ootpds. [Amis

preference to that of Luke, where conformity to either, on hb
part, is at all exhibited. The result of the above examination
IS, that there is no correctness in the allegation that he has.

I will not say that Matthew in the case supposed, does not
oftener agree with Marie than Luke, where the two latter daSkr
from each other ; but my examination has led me in some good
measure to dbtrust even so much as this. It happeped, I pre-
sume, to Bishop Marsh and Mr. Norton, that in their compari-
sons, pursued perhaps to quite a moderate extent, Matthew ap»
peared to agnse mostly, (Bishop Marsh says entirely)^ with
Mark. But it b impossible to pursue this investigation to any
great length, and yet retain the belief that such is the exclusive,
or (I would even venture to say) the habitual fact. I have
opened my Greek Harmony at random throughout ; and not
one page have I any where examined, without finding facts to
contradict the theory of Bishop Marsh and Mr. Norton. It
is impossible for me to believe, therefore, that a more extennve
examination still will not produce more overwhelmmg tesUmony
against it.

One other sensation, or persuasion (if this be abetter name),
has been produced in a manner that I shall never forget ; and
this is a deep and thorough feeling, that the discrepancies of
style and manner of expression in the Evangelists so immeasu-
rably exceed the identities, that there is not the least proba-
bility that they copied each other, or copied any common doc-
uments. These diversities, indeed, are not such as can well
be presented on paper. They can be learned only by being
seen and felt. The reader must take up his Greek Harmony,
and spend a few hours in making the most minute comparisons ;
and when he has done this, I think I can venture to say, that
he never again will open his ears to any charge of plagiarism^
or of mere labour like that of copyists or redactors^ made against
the Evangelists. In the parts where the resemblance between
them is strongest of all, the diversity b still such as to leave not
the least doubt on my mind of composition original and inde-
pendent.

The conviction that such b the case springs from the nature
of the diversities in question. No earthly motive can be as-
signed for them, in case either or all of the writers were plagia-
rists or oopybts. They are not corrections^ nor emendations^
nor addenda; they concern neither the rhetoric nor the sense
of the passages in which they stand. They are evidently the

i888«] Oetwinenett of tk€ Goipeb. 335

simple difierences in modes of expression which are personal
and inbredy if not inborn ; and difierences like to these, are
always found, at all times and in all acres, between the modes
of expression in different mdividuals.

Were I not afraid of wearying out the reader, I would now
proceed to show how little of correctness there is in the other
part of Mr. Norton's theory and that of Bishop Marsh, in rela-
tion to the general subject before us, viz., that Matthew and
Luke &11 into striking coincidences, where they are the only
two narrators.

Let the reader turn to p. 16 of the Greek Harmony, and
compare the minute history of the temptation of the Saviour, in
the two Evangelists. Let him notice not only the difference
in style and manner of these narrations, but also the fact that
even the order of two of the cases of temptation is reversed in
one of these historians.

Let him next turn to the Sermon on the Mount (p. 40 seq.)
and see what striking diversities there are in the narrations
there. Then let him cast his eye on the history of the healing
of the Centurion's servant, p. 47 ; where the diversity is so
great, that even contradiction has been not unfrequently alleged
agamst it. Go next to the conference between Jesus and some
of John's disciples (p. 49), and, if we except the words of Jesus
as repeated by both Evangelists, bow little of exact coincidence
shall we find ! And thus might I proceed until I should point
out every section of the Gospel history which is peculiar to these
two writers. The whole amount, however, is but compara-
tively small.

I do not, therefore, and I cannot, after such an examination
as I have made, admit at all the statements in question of Bish-
op Marsh and Mr. Norton. Facts do not support them. Of
course I cannot admit that any of the deductions which Mr.
Norton draws from them, are at all substantiated on this ground.

I have only one more remark to make on this already pro-
tracted topic. This is, that the very reasoning which Mr. Nor-
ton has employed with so much power and success in over-
throwing the general theory of a jProtevangeliumy may be em-
ployed against his own view of what the Greek translator of
Matthew must be supposed to have done. Nothbg can be
more certam to mv mind, than that the characteristics of the
present Gospel of"^ Matthew do not admit of the idea, that a
translator reduced thb book to its present form, by partly adopt-

386 Oenuheness of the OoipeU. [April

ing Mark, partly leaning upon Luke, and then again depencfing
on himself. My own belief as to the style of the book, is, that
it is such as not even to admit the supposition of its being a
version at all. But of this more in its proper place.

As to some other allegations made by Bishop Marsh, and
stated by Mr. Norton in a Note on p. clxxiv., viz., that the
|7ropor^u>na7 coincidence is greater between Matthew and Luke,
when they are the sole narrators, than exists elsewhere in case
all three are the narrators ; that in those portions of Matthew's
Gospel which " occupy different places" from the correspond-
ing ones in Mark, there is no verbal coincidence between them ;
and that in portions common only to Mark and Luke there are
but two instances of verbal agreement between them ; Mr. Nor-
ton himself doubts the first and last. I can only add here, that
I do not think there is any good foundation for either of the
three assertions ; and if in any particular case the facts be as
stated, they arise from a cause very different from that stated by
the Bishop.

Mr. Norton next goes into an examination of the quesiio vex*
ata respecting the discrepancies in the chronoheical order of
events as stated by the Evangelists. He speaks ramiliarly here,
as I observe with regret, of mistakes and misarrangements d
Luke and Mark, in some well known cases where they difier
from Matthew in the respect just mentioned. The general
principle for solving the difficulty in question Mr. Norton thinks
to be, the fact that Luke and Mark only heard oral accotmts of
the words and deeds of Jesus, where like things were naturally
often grouped together ; while Matthew, being an eye and ear-
witness of the whole, followed an arrangement that comports
with the order in which every thing actually took place.

But how, I ask, comes it on this ground, that Matthew, more
than any other Evangelist, should have grouped together dis-
courses evidently delivered at different tiroes ? For example ;
the parables contained in chap. xiii. of his Gospel. According
to many critics, the Sermon on the Mount, Matt, v — vii., is
made up in the same way ; and although I doubt this, yet I
ciannot but admit that in many cases Matthew has grouped
events in a matter not usual in the other Gospels. The con-
trary of this must have happened, if Mr. Norton is right in his
conjectures.

My own apprehension of this whole matter is indeed quite
different, it waM seem, from that of Mr. Norton. The first

1838.] Genuimiiess of tliQ Gospels. 337

question which presents itself to my mind^ in the investigation
of this subject, is, whether the Evangelists ever intended to give
a narration of events in the life of Jesus, in such a manner (as
to arrangement) as that in which biographical narrations are
mostly conducted in modern times, i. e. following the chronoh-
gical series of events ? That they did not design this, I am fully
persuaded, from the fact that it would have been easy to ac-
complish such a task at the time when the Gospels were writ-
ten, inasmuch as many eye-witnesses, and apostles among these,
were still living. But they were more occupied with the say-
ings and doings of Jesus, than with the exact order of them.

Why need this be accounted strange ? There are four books
extant, respecting the sayings and doings of the greatest moral
philosopher that the heathen world has ever produced ; and
these were written too by a consummate master of rhetoric and
history ; yet these partake, in no degree, of a regular and cbro-
oological arrangement. I refer to the Memorabilia of Xeno-
phon. Would it add any thing important to this peculiarly
mteresting book, if it were all digested according to the rules of
chronology ? I think every discerning reader will say : Nothing.

Such then was the fashion, if any please so to name it, of
writing in ancient times, among men of the most cultivated
minds and enlightened understanding. Should this offend us,
when we meet with it among the Jewish writers ?

There are, indeed, some circumstances in every case of this
nature, which will not bear an arrangement that is not chronolo-
gical. Such are the occurrences of birth and early life, and also
of death. It could be only a perverted taste, which would in-
termingle these with an account of what was done and said in
the midst of active life. But when the period of action is so
short as that of Jesus — only about three and a half years-—
when this was a period of unintermitted preaching and benevo-
lent action and miraculous cures ; when an account of this is
^ven simply for a religious and moral purpose ; when nothing
of the effect to be produced by the narration depends on exact
chronological arrangement, but simply on the evidence and truth
of facts themselves ; and particularly when all these circum-
stances meet and combine in any particular case ; why should
we be stumbled by the fact, that a narration is not in keeping
with our modem and occidental maxims of criticism with re-
spect to writing biography.

That Matthew naturally followed the general tenor of ev^ts

Vol. XI. No. 30. 43

338 Genuineness of the Gospels. [Afril

as they occurred, may certainly be admitted ; or rather, it shoald
be admitted, for it seems to be quite probable that be did.
Having been present as an eye and ear-witness, nothing would
be easier than for him to present the great outlines of facts ars
they originally succeeded each other. Yet even he, in some
cases where be evidently groups things of a like kind, did not
think it at all important to be bound in chronological chains.
He has narrated in a free, and also in a natural, manner.

As to Luke and Mark, I suppose it will not be now contended
that either of them were eye or ear-witnesses. Their condi-
tion, then, was evidently different from that of Matthew, to
whom a clue had naturally been ^jven by the circumstances in
which he had been placed. They had heard a multitude of
accounts respecting the life and actions of the Saviour, many
more, no doubt, than those which they have recorded ; out of
these they were to choose ; and unless chronological order had
been before their minds as an important circumstance, one could
not expect they would be solicitious to preserve it in respect to
minute circumstances. Nothing depended on it, in regard to
the objects which they laboured to accomplish. They differ,
therefore, as we might naturally suppose, not only from Mat-
thew in some respects, as to the order of events, but also from
each other. (See Mr. Norton's Addenda, p. cxii. in the Note
at the bottom.)

I would appeal now to the candour of every considerate
reader, and ask him, whether, in such a case as that before us,
where it would have been easy for each writer, had he deemed
it to be of any importance to his design, to make such bquiries
as would produce the same order in all — whether it does not
lie upon the very face of the compositions before us, that par-
ticular and minute chronological order was not at all a matter of
design?

[f this be conceded, then I would ask, whether the alleged
mistakes, or contradictions , or misarrangements, of the writers
in Question, in regard to the point before us, can properly be
spoken of as being plmn and certain ? If a writer has placed
events out of the actual order in which they occurred, and for

Purposes satisfactory to his own mind ; and if, at the same time,
e made it no object to follow chronological order ; where is
fais mistake in this matter ? What seems now to be plain is, that
the Evangelists had not the matter of chronology in their eye,
in any other manner than the general one stated above ; and

1838.] Oenuinene$$ of the Oospeh. 339

that even Matthew himself, who has adhered more closely to it
thantheothers, did so simply OD the ground that his circumstances
more naturally led him to do so, and not because it was a mat-
ter of special design on his part.

Mr. Norton has gone into a long disquisition in relation to
some of the narrations of Luke, which he deems to be " mis-
placed," and to be deprived of more or less of their appropriate
meaning by this circumstance. It would occupy too much
room here to follow him through these remarks. While they
shew that he has vigorously applied his mind to the subjects
discussed, many of his exegetical remarks will not, so far as I
am able to judge, give satisfaction to some of his exegetical rea-
ders. I must regard most of this discussion as unnecessary, be-
cause my views on the subject of chronological arrangement are
so widely different, as it would seem, from those which he
entertains.

Note E. is a long and able one, on the question, whether Jus-
tin Martyr has actually quoted our canonical Gospel ? a subject
already discussed at some length in the text ol his book, but
here more particularly and minutely examined. Mr. Norton
gives us many specimens here of Justin's quotations, with a
comparison of the Gospels from which be quotes ; also of his
quotations from the Septuagint ; of his repeated quotations of
the same passages in the Gospels ; and of coincidences between
him and the Greek text of Matthew, where Matthew deviates
in his quotations from the Septuagint. To these the author has
added remarks on the mode of quoting Scripture generally
among the ancient Fathers of the church ; ana finally he has
examined the new hypothesis of Credner, viz., that Justin used
the Oospel of Peter as the source of his quotations. The ob-
jections whk;h he makes to Credner's views are certainly ol
much weight ; nor can I deem it possible, that Credner should
render the main propositions comprised in his theory probable
to the mind of any impartial critic well versed in the literature
and criticism of the early ages of Christianity.

Mr. Norton will not complain that his book has been treated
with neglect, and brought before the public as worth only a

rassing and hasty notice. He will rather complain, I fear, that
have almost interfered with his rights as an author, in extract-
ing so largely from it. But I can assui'e the reader of this re-
view, that Mr. Norton's book contains a great many passages
which are excellent, that I have not thought proper to copy ;

340 Oenidneneii of the OorptU. [ Apkii#

and there are very cogent reasons, therefore, why he should
procure and read the whole book.

Mr. Norton will also perceive, thai widely as I suppose my-
self to differ from him in regard to some points of theology^
and perhaps even of criticism, but certainly of exegesis, yet [
am not disposed in any measure to underrate his efforts on the
common ground in which we are agreed. He has achieved a
service which was very important in the present state of criti-
cism and of skepticism.

As I have but a very moderate appetite for heresy4iunt]agy
so 1 have not endeavoured to record every expression in Mr.
Norton's book, which indicates a mode of thinking difierent
from that which is generally called, and which I believe to be,
orthodox. I fear that Mr. Norton rejects altogether the idea of
inspiration in respect to the Gospels. I hope it is not so ; but
he sometimes speaks in such a way, that the belief of this is
forced upon me. He tells us of things " erroneously referred
by Mark ;" that ** Luke coirfounded the discourse ; " that he
"did not sufBciently discriminate" certain things; that he
" misplaced " the words of John on a certain occasion ; that he
" misplaced " another discourse of the Saviour ; that he " mis-
apprehended " his meaning on another occasion ; that Lnke i. ii.
has a "fabulous hue," and that " fiction and miracle are blend-
ed " there. On p. clxx. he gives an account, in a Note, of
the manner in which Paul became informed of the truths of
Christianity, in which he does not even advert to the fact re-
peatedly asserted by Paul, that the Saviour had appeared to
him and had instructed him, and that on this very ground no
apostle could claim a precedence over him. From a few things
of this nature in the work before us, I am reluctantly obliged to
believe, that the author does not admit the idea of inspiration
in respect to the Gospels. He evidently views them as credibh
books, and worthy of all acceptation ; with the exception of
some few passages which he deems to be spurious, but which I
shall not particularize, since they have already been noted in
the preceeding pages.

It is a matter of sincere regret to me, that such passages as
the above should be found in a work the tone and temper of
which, at large, are truly worthy of imitation. The author
seems to have set out with the full design not to give unnecessary
offence to any class of his readers, and to present to the public
a specimen of writing similar in its tone and manner to that of

1838.] Genumeness of tht Oospels. 341

Lardner. He should have foil credit for this. And if now
and then he has expressed himself without a recollection of this
his general design, it would be foolish in the reader to reject the
mass of good there is in the book, because of the few things^
of this kind which he may deem to be blemishes. I indulge
the hope, that when this book comes to a second edition^ (and
if it meet its just deserts it certainly will), the author will sacri-
fice even the few remnants of his peculiar theology, which now
and then gleam upon us, to the hope and prospect of the great-
er good which may be evidently achieved by his book in case
they are omitted. To his own individual sentiments he of
couise mast have a right, which none but his IVIaker can lawful-
ly call in question. But it is not necessary that he should in-
sist on the declaration of them in this valuable book, and
especially it is unnecessary to declare them on a point, where,
if he believes as I fear he does, the conviction that the Gos-
pels are genuine would add little or nothhig to the obligation
which the world at large would feel, to admit them as their Lex
JSkprema in all cases of moral action.

1 should decline the task, if it were in any way assigned to
cne, of undertaking to shew, that minds of a certain cast might
or might not truly and smcerely believe in the Gospels, and re-
<seive them as the rule of faith and practice, although they re-
jected the idea that these Gospels were composed by writer*
under the influence of divine inspiration. I suppose it might
be rendered probable to an enlightened mind, that the actual
admission of the essential truths of the Gospel, as a rule of &ith
and practice, would belong to the substance of iaith ; a belief
as to the manner in which the books had originated which pre-
sented these truths, would certainly be only a secondary ingre-
<lient in faith, when placed at its highest just estimation. Mr.
Norton may say, periiaps, and it seems probable to me that he
would say, that he admits the first, whUe he doubts about the
last. But still, with all the respect that I cheerfully accord to
the serious manner in which he presents and views the Gospels,
I cannot help entertaining the most serious doubts, whether
general skepticism, or rather practical infidelity, would not at
last be the result of inculcating principles such as he holds, in
regard to the authority, or rather I should say, perhaps, the
origin of our sacred books. I do not take upon myself to de-
termine, how minds like Mr. Norton's might decide respecting
the authority of the Crospels, when they had been trained and

d42 Oenuheness oftke Ootpels. [April

•chastened in the school of moral philosophy and in all the dis-
•c^pline of a theological school ; but it is unnecessary to decide
xhis, because the proportion of men in our community who are
xbus trained is so small. One thing, however, we may safely
AVer, viz., that any mere conviction of the genuineness of the
gospels — any mere intellectual admission that they are correct
and credible accounts of the life and doctrines of the Saviour —
can and will never move the mass of men to yield to their aur
iharity. Does not Mr. Norton see, that this last point is so
.necessary, that all the rest being gained, nothing important is
gained unless this follow as a sequent to the others ? But ta-
king men as they are, with all that worldly spirit and all those
desires of carnal indulgence which they possess and which they
are for the most part heartily set upon gratifying, is there (hu-
manly speaking) any chance to make real practical converts to
Christianity, when the Scriptures are divested of divine author-
ity, and made to extend no further than fallible human author-
ity can go ? The hope of converting a sinful world on such
grounds, does appear to me absolutely desperate. Without
rundertaking positively to decide, what a few minds trained
like that of Mr. Norton might possibly admit, and how they
jnight be influenced, can I hesitate to believe, that when the
jdivine authority of the Gospels is given up, all is given up
which gives them (if I may so speak) any chance oi success in
s, world like this ?

Mr. Norton needs not to be informed, that theoretical be-
lievers are not such as the apostle James thinks ought to be
ranked among Christians, whose faith is well-anchored. Im-
.portant as his own book is, therefore, (and he must see that I
.deem it to be a performance of great merit in many respects,
and deserving of very general attention), yet the community
might go where his performance would carry them, and not be
•any thing more than theoretical believers. What is the next
and the ultimate appeal then ? Mr. Norton does not even pre-
tend to be an authority. And if his readers should lay down
his book^ with a conviction that his positions are well sustained,
■and still be inclined to ask, as many of them doubtless will ask :
Why am I obliged to receive the gospels as my rule of faith
jmd practice ? what other answer can be given on Mr. Norton's
.ground^ than that they have the honest opinion of fallible men
respecting the life and doctrines of Jesas Christ, and therefore
they ought to adopt it ? If now such readers should rejoin

1838.] Oenuineness of the Oospels, 34^**

and say to Mr. Norton ; We have indeed their opinion or their
account of these matters ; but inasmuch as you admit that they
have ''misapprehended" some things, "confounded" others^
** misplaced some, and " not sufficiently discriminated" in re-
spect to others ; while you even admit that they have " blend-
ed fable and fiction together ;" how can we, who are not, like
you, well-read critics, and have no knowledge of the original
Scriptures, in any way distinguish between the cases which you
thus present to our view, and those where you admit that mere
and simple facts and truths are stated ? — if, I say, such ques-
tions should be asked, (and they certainly will be), then will
Mr. Norton tell us what answer is to be given that will " stop*
the mouths of such gainsayers ?" I know of none. Where
Mr. Norton doubts, he can be appealed to in many ways which
are closed up with regard to such individuals as I have just
described. But when they doubt, even after reading his book,
whether to give their practical assent to Christianity, how are
they to be made to feel the awful responsibility under which
they place themselves by rejecting the word of the living God ?

But I am not writing against Mr. Norton's theology, nor com-^
posing a polemical essay against skepticism. I will therefore de-
sist. The importance of the subject ; the attitude in which Mr.
Norton's remarks have placed it ; and the obligation which lies
upon every conscientious reviewer not to conceal things in a work
l!he tendency of which he believes will be exceedingly hazard-
ous ; have induced me to say thus much. I am sure Mr. Nor-
ton, with his desires of canvassing all subjects, and with his
strenuous sentiments as it respects liberty to speak our opinions,
will neither inisconstrue nor take amiss what I have now said.

I have only to add, that the book is printed throughout with
great correctness and elegance. A small number of mistakes
in the typographical execution, an attentive perusal of the
whole has discovered; but they are too trifling to deserve
mention. The press at Cambridge has few rivals indeed in
this country, as to the correctness with which it executes its
publications*

344 ThAi Head of the Churdi, [Apbil

ARTICLE II.

The Head of the Church, Head over all things ; il-
lustrated BT Analogies between Nature, Providence,
and Grace.

Bj W. S. Tjlor, ProfaMor orLftoguafea, Amherai Cullege.

The Head of the church is likewise ^' head over all things"
— sovereign alike in the kingdom of nature, the kingdom of
providence, and the kingdom of grace. He is ^^ Qod over oS"
— the God of nature, of providence, and of grace. This is evi-
dently a doctrine of revelation^ directly asserted in many passa-
ges,* and clearly implied in the whole tenor of Scripture.

It is my present design to show, that reason teaches the same
doctrine — ^that a rational and candid examination and compari-
son of the kingdoms of nature, providence and grace will lead
us to the conclusion, that they have the same head. My ar-
guments will be drawn from Analogy ^ ^' that powerful engine,
which" as has been well said, '^ in the mind oi a Newton, dis-
covered to us the laws of all other worids, and in that of Co-
lumbus, put us in full possession of our own ;" and which, it
might have been added, in the mind of a Butler disclosed to us
the indissoluble ties, that pervade the economy of the natural
and the spiritual worlds. The analogies which run through
nature, providence and grace, are such, as if not to establish the
proposition, yet to create a strong presumption, that they have
the same head, and are in fact but difierent provinces of the
same empire — distinct departments of the same government.

The pnncti^Ze involved in this argument is so fully elucidated
and so powerfully enforced by Butler in his '^ Analogy," as to
be familiar to the memory, and convincing to the judgment, of
every reader of that important work. He has left little for
those, who come after him, to do, but to gather new instances
of analogy and thus furnish fresh illustrations of the prmciple
and additional confirmations of the argument. This field of
investigation, which Butler merely opened to our view, is as
boundless as the universe ; its treasures and wonders will be

• Epli. 1: ^X Rom. 9: 5.

1838.] Head over all Tilings. 345

exhausted only when the plan of God's universal government
is fully developed and perfectly understood. Into this field my
readers are now invited, with the promise, that if they discover
nothing new, they shall see something, that cannot fail to be
interesting to the admiring student of the divine works.

1. The first analogy, which I shall mention, respects the
qtudifications for entering into the kingdoms, whether to ex-
plore, or to enjoy them. In all these alike, the qualifications
are humUky and faith.

Without a humble and modest spirit, we are unprepared to
investigate the question before us. On the outermost walls and
gates of each of the kingdoms, which we are about to examine
and compare, on every side is inscribed the motto : " LiCt no
man enter here, save in the garb of humility." Bacon was the
first to discover and apply this analogy. ^* The kingdom of
men founded in science," he says, " is like the kingdom of
heaven ; no man can enter into it, except in the character of a
little child." A child-like humility and docility was the key
by which he opened the vestibule of nature, and in his " Novum
Organum," he committed the same key into the hands of sub-
sequent philosophers and commended it to them, as alone ca-
pable of unlocking every chamber and cloister in the spacious
temple. It need scarcely be remarked that the same key is
necessary and adequate to unlock the mysteries of providence
and of revelation.

The book of nature, the book of providence, and the book of
grace are severally dedicated to children. None but those
who have the simplicity and docility, the humble and inquiring
disposition of little children are permitted to read them, n
others make the attempt, they cannot understand, still less relish
their contents.

Without a figure, they who would study the system of nature,
providence or grace, must come disposed and prepared, not to
determine how things should be, but to inquire how things are;
not to dogmatize and dictate, but to learn and obey ; not to rea-
son a priori, but to observe and infer. And they who would
live happily under either system, must have a contented and
submissive spirit, and wear the apparel of humility and modesty.

Faith in its essential elements sustains a relation to each oH

the three kingdoms akin to that which humility sustains. It is

the pasnfort for admission. Not a step can be taken in the

study ofnature or the observation of Providence, any more than

Vol. XI. No. 30. 44

346 7%e Head of the Church, [Amu

in the knowledge of revelation, without a belief in the divine
veracity — ^in other words a belief that God will fulfil his tacit
promise by maintaining a uniformity in his laws and plans of
operation. It confers the right of citizenship. No man can
be a useful or happy citizen in the kingdom of nature, provi*
dence, or grace, without combining with the intellectual belief
just mentioned, a heartfelt confidence in the power, wisdom and
goodness of the supreme Ruler of the Universe.

Hence it is, that true science and true religion mutually aid
each other. Pure Christianity begets the confiding modesty
yet eager hope of the philosopher ; and sound philosophy fos-
ters the humility and faith of the Christian. The philoso-
pher believes any thing with evidence, nothing without ; and so
does the Christian. The Christian feels himself to be merely
a humble inquirer at the oracles of God, with no authority to
dictate, no power to control ; and so does the philosopher.
The proud and dogmatizing spirit of the old Greek philosophers
was not more unchristian than it was unphilosophical ; accord-
ingly their knowledge of nature and providence was as crude as
their notions of religion. The same spirit as exhibited by tbe
modem schools of a priori reasoning is not more unphilosophi-
cal than it is unchristian ; accordingly while most philosophers
of the observing school have been believers in revelation, skep-
ticism has made sad havoc among those of the school of reason-
ers a priori. The humble, inquiring and believing philosophy
of Socrates made him almost a Christian without a revelation.
The proud, dictating and dogmatizing philosophy of the Ger-
man Neologist makes him an infidel in spite of revelation. We
know not, whether the modesty of Newton partakes more
largely of true religion or of sound philosophy. We know that
Voltaire in his arrogance and conceit was neither a philosopher
nor a Christian. The humble believer, — he it is in every age,
that discovers tbe truths, beholds the wonders, and enjoys the
blessings, of nature, providence and grace — he alone possesses
the clue, that will conduct him through the labyrinth of the
divine works. To return to the figure, with which this head
was introduced, humility and faith, not exactly in their Christian
forms but in their essential elements, are the passports for admis-
sion, and the qualifications for citizenship alike in the kingdom
of nature, the kingdom of providence, and the kingdom of grace.
This analogy, so interesting in itself, it was peculiarly appropri-
ate and important, that we should notice at the commencement

1838.] Head over all Tilings. 347

of our inquiries. But we must not linger about the walls ; let
us enter the kingdoms in the spirit of humble and believing in-
quirers, and we shall find secondly, that

2. They are all governed by general laws. This is a char-
acteristic feature of the divine government. Human govern-
ments multiply statutes, and strive, but strive in vain, to enact an
express law for every specific case. Each day gives birth to an
unforeseen emergency, and calls for a new enactment. With the
increase of population and national prosperity, the difiSculty of
legislation increases, till the uninterrupted exercise of legislative
wisdom is insufficient to provide for the ever varying interests
and relations of the people.

Suppose now some lawgiver should arise, who could com-
prise every specific right and duty and interest and relation in
one simple, comprehensive law. How would he throw into the
shade the far-famed lawgivers of antiquity, and the boasting
legislators of the present day ! But Lycurgus and Solon may
rest in peace in their glory ; and our representatives in the
Legislative hall need indulge no fear of being superseded in
their functions and prerogatives. Such a legislator never has
arisen and never will appear.

Yet it is by such laws that the kingdoms of nature, provi-
dence and grace are governed. Take for examples the law of
gravitation, the law of society, and the law of love.

The first regulates the relations and movements of every
world and every atom in the material universe. The falling
pebble and the rising mote, the descending rain and the ascend-
ing fog, the revolving planet, the eccentric comet and the cen->
tral sun are alike subject to its sway.

The second regulates the relations and movements of eveijr
individual in society. Not a human being but feels the power
of the social principle attracting him towards other human be-
ings. None are so high as to be independent of the principle ;
none so low as to escape its all pervading influence^

In like manner, the third regulates the relations and move-
ments of every Christian in the church. However di&rent
their denominations and forms and ceremonies^ however diverse
their rank or talent, or dress, or deportment may be, just so
far as they are Christians, all their thoughts and feelings and
words and actions are controlled by one general law-r-*the law
of love. Thus the material, the social, the spiritual universe
each has one general law, all-porvading, all-controlling and all«
comprehensive.

348 T%e Head of the Church, [April.

And these laws bear a mutual analogy not only in their uni*
Dersalityy but in their nature. They are all laws of attraciiony
of association, of union. There is a bond of society and of ho-
ly brotherhood in the natural as well as the moral world. It
requires no very lively imagination to see in the planet and its
satellites the emblem of a liarmonious and happy family ; in
the solar system, a larger circle of affectionate friends and neigh-
bors ; in those groups of solar systems which revolve perhaps
about some common centre, so many well regulated and well
governed nations ; and in the universe of worlds all circling
around the central throne of God, a counterpart of what the hu-
man race would be, did they but yield as perfect obedience to
the law of their social and moral nature as the heavenly bodies
render to the law of gravitation. On the other hand, what is
holy love but a principle of attraction, a law of gravitation in
the spiritual world, which unites individual Christians into par-
ticular churches, particular churches into the church universal,
the church on earth to the spirits of the just made perfect in hea-
ven, the whole general assembly and church of the first bom,
to the innumerable company of the angels^ and all holy beings
fast to the throne of the Most Hic:h !

Knit like the social stars in love,
Fair as the moon and clear
As yonder sun enthroned ahove,
Christians through life appear.

And in the future life, when the repelling and disturbing pow-
er of selfishness will be annihilated, oh, how strong will be the
bond, bow exquisite the harmony, how beautiful and blissful
the union and sympathy, that pervades the church triumphant —
the holy universe !

3. The laws in each kingdom are self-executing. This is
another characteristic analogy, which pervades the various de-
partments of the divine government.

In human governments, it is usually quite as difficult to exe~
cute the laws as to make them. The executive does not al-
ways understand them, sometimes wilfully misinterprets or fails
to execute them ; and even when the agents of the govern-
ment are well disposed and efficient men, they are utterly in-
capable either of securing perfect obedience to the laws, or of
punishmg every instance of disobedience. The man, who
dhould devise a code of laws, that would execute themselves,
would be an unrivalled benefactor to bis species and would ac-
quire for himself an imperishable renown.

1838.] Head over all Things. 349

Such now are the laws of nature, providence and grace.
They are inwrought into the very constitution, stamped on the
forehead, graven upon the heart of the subject. " I will

fut my law in their inward parts and write it upon their
earts" Such is the decree of heaven promulgated in relation^
to the kingdom of grace, and the realms of nature and provi-
dence are governed according to the same decree. Every sub-
ject yields obedience to the law from the necessity of his na-
ture, or if in the exercise of free-agency, he disobeys, he can-
not help the self-infliction of the penalty. Every man must
obey the laws of his physical nature, or injure his health and
shorten or destroy his life. He must obey the laws of his so-
cial nature, or torture himself, while he wrongs and provokes
others. He must obey the laws of his moral and spiritual be-
ing, or conscience condemns and passion rages and consumes
the offender.

Take the laws already specified, the law of gravitation, the
law of society and the law of love. Obedience to each secures
order and harmony, safety and beauty. Disobedience is imme-
diaiely and inevitably followed by disorder, confusion and
ruin. " The wreck of matter and tne crush of worlds," which
would attend a suspension of the law of attraction, is but a type
of the jarring and collision of fiercer elements and the wreck
and ruin of dearer interests, which are consequent upon a sus-
pension of the social principle and the law of love. While on
the other band, the harmonious and beautiful order of the ma-
terial universe as it is, is an emblem fit of the harmony, peace
and happiness, that would pervade the spiritual world on condi-
tion of perfect obedience to the law of social reciprocity and
universal benevolence.

"Tbere^B not an orb, which thou behold'st
But ID his motion, like an angel sings
Still quiring to the young-eyed cberubims:
Such harmoMf is in immortal souls^
But while this muddy vesture of decay
Doth grossly close it in, we cannot bear it."

4. There is a striking analogy in the degree and manner of
sovereignty exercised in each of the kingdoms.

Does God make one creature an animalcule to float in the
minutest drop of spray, and another a great whale to traverse
the boundless ocean ; one a reptile to crawl in the dust, another

350 The Head of the Church, [April

a lion to roam the monarch of the forest, and a third an eagle
to soar above the clouds ; the zoophyte scarcely to be distin-
guished from the senseless plant, and man to bear the image of
his Maker and exercise in part the sovereignty of the universal
LfOrd — ^without consulting at all the wishes of his creatures ?

In like manner, his providence has cast one man's lot in the
wilderness a wandering savage, and another's in the city amid
luxury and refinement ; has exalted one to sit king on a throne,
and doomed another to toil a slave in the mines, has taught one
to range the universe, " borne on thought's most rapid wing,"
and left another to confine his views to his native valley and his
necessities to the supply of his bodily wants — and he has done
all this without consulting the preference of the individuals con-
cerned.

That a similar sovereignty is exercised in the kingdom of
grace, need scarcely be stated, for it forms a standing objection
to the administration of that realm. There too '^ it is not of
him that wiUeth nor of him that runneth but of God, that show-
eth mercy. The angels sin, and are all thrust down to the
realms of darkness and despair. Man rebels, and an atone-
ment is provided for his salvation. Yet only a part of mankind
are destined to obtain eternal life, while the remainder are left
to perish in their sins. Some are bom to live and die heathen,
while a Christian birth-right and inheritance fall to the lot of
others.

There is no democracy, no levelling, no fear of distinctions
in any part of God's government ; and it is most unreasonable
and inconsistent, that they, who have always recognized the
exercise of absolute sovereignty in some parts of his govern-
ment should be surprised to discover the same sovereignty in
other parts, and that ihey, who find no fault with the principle
in nature and providence, should consider the same principle an
insuperable objection to the administration of divine grace.

There is an analogy also as to the manner in which or the
jnincwle on which the sovereignty is exercised. " I thank
thee O Father, Lord of heaven and earth," says Christ, " that
thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent and hast
revealed them unto babes-~even so Father, for so it seemed
good in thy sight." In like manner Paul says in relation to
his own times. " Ye see your calling, brethren, how that not
many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many no-
ble are called, but God hath chosen the foolish things of the

1838.] Head over all Things. 351

world to confound the wise, and God bath chosen the weak
thinfl;s of the world to confound the mighty, and base things of
the world and things which are despised hath he chosen, yea
and things which are not, to bring to nought things which are."

The great principle involved in both these passages is that
the heirs of earthly good are not usually chosen to inherit spir-
itual blessings. And it is a principle, which pervades every
department of God's government, that he seldom lavishes all
his favors upon the same individuals. The treasures of nature,
of providence, and of grace are all infinite, yet they are meted
out with a sparing and a discriminating hand.

How liberal has nature been in the provision of her gifts,
yet how parsimonious in the distribution of them ! The sum
total is beyond calculation, the dividend is usually smalL
Through the whole range of animals, how rarely are strength
and agility combined, beauty and melody blended, cunning and
courage united ! The gaudy plumage of the peacock and the
sweet voice of the nightingale pever meet. The strength and
ferocity of the lion do not coexist with the cunning of the fox
or the reason of man.

So Providence rarely allots learning to the king or rank to the
scholar. He takes health and peace away from both, and
makes them the portion of the obscure and illiterate peasant.
The healthy are not usually the wealthy, nor the wealthy the
wise. Solomon stands almost alone as at once the greatest, the
richest and the wisest man in his kingdom. God has given to
tropical climes beauty and fertility, but he has also given them
the tempest and the tornado. He has doomed the inhabitants
of temperate climes and mountainous regions to toil and fatigue,
but he has rewarded them by " health, peace, and competence,"
and in like manner Grace has made exhaustless provision for
our spiritual wants. Heaven was emptied of its choicest trea-
sure and brightest glory to procure gifts for men, yet these gifts
are not lavished upon those, who have already full hands and
surfeited hearts. The Gospel was committed, not to the Liter-
ati at Rome, or the Rabbis at Jerusalem, but to the Fishermen
of Galilee, It was preached unto the poor, and embraced by
the humble and unlearned. It is the poor and hungry, the
weeping and mourning, the despised and persecuted that inherit
the christian beatitudes. If you would find the abodes of vir-
tue and piety, you must go, not where

the spicy breezes
Blow soft o*er Ceylon'i isle,

1

35'2 The Head of the Church, [April

And every prospect pleaaes,
And only man is vile ;

but to New England's rock bound coast and Iceland's frozen
shores, the rugged mountains of Scotland, or the inaccessible
fastnesses of the High Alps.

5. There is the same necessity for active exertion in each
of the three kingdoms. Divine Sovereignty and human agency
run parallel through nature, ]>rovidence, and grace. It b the
law of the kingdom of grace. << Work out your own salvation
with fear and trembling, for it is God who worketh in you
both to will and to do of his good pleasure." It is the law of

f)rovidence, ^^ God helps those, that help themselves," and the
aw of nature, " The sun-shine and the plough cover the valleys
over with corn." " The blessing of the Lord, it maketh rich,"
naturally, intellectually spiritually rich, but not without ^^ the
hand of the diligent."

He, who would explore the mysteries of nature, providence
and grace, must study hard ; and he must labor hard, who would
secure and enjoy their blessings. In the sweat of his face man
eats his bread. This life gives us nothing without great labor,*
and strait is the gate and narrow the way, that leads to life
everlasting. We must agonize to enter the kingdoms of nature
and providence as well as the kingdom of grace — all alike suf-
fer violence and the violent take them by force.

The divine agency may be more or less secret and inscruta-
ble, and we may not be able to discern the connection between
the means required of man and the end to be accomplished,
'^et both are absolutely essential to the accomplishment of the end.

e cannot discover the manner of divine and human cooperation,
yet is it an obvious fact, that without that cooperation, we can
put forth no successful effort of body, mind or heart ; transact
no important business in the natural or the spiritual world ; se-
cure no valuable interest for time or eternity. The Creator's
efficiency and the creature's responsibility, absolute dependance
and entire free agency, run parallel throughout the natural and
the moral universe.

6. There is the same apparent mixture of good and evil,

* T&p yoLQ ortwf iya&op xd xalwp ohdip Srsv nopov xal iinfidumg
Btol didoaiTtp ip&qmtoig, Xenopbon, Memorabilia. IL 1: 28.

Nil sine magno
Vita labore dedit mortanbu8.~Horace Sat 9. Lib. I.

fe^

18S8.] Head aver aU Things. 353

order and confusion, light and darkness, in each of the three
kingdoms.

Look where you will in this world, you see a chequered
scene. The eye of man never rests on a spot of unmixed
good or unmixed ill. Not a creature exists within the whole
range of our observation, that does not drink a cup of mingled
sweet and bitter. What animal ever lived and died without
experiencing both pleasure and pain ? Man, does he receive
good at the hand of Providence, and does he not also receive
evil ? Nor is there a just man on earth, that doeth good and
sinneth not. Natural good and natural evil, providential good
and providential evil, spiritual good and spiritual evil every
where commingle. Like opposite polarities, the existence of
the one always indicates the existence of the other.''^

Are there " wars and fightings " in the spirittud world 1 So
there are in society. So there are in the animal kingdom.
There is war every where on earth— there was war in heaven
once. Natural, civil and ecclesiastical history are severally his-
tories of alternate war and peace, battles and truces, cruel oppres-
sions and cruel sufferings. ^' The whole creation groaneth and
travailetb in pain together J*'

Does slavery exist io human society ? So it does among the
lower animals. White ants, like white men, capture their color-
ed brethren, and doom them to involuntary, perpetual servi-
tude.! And slavery exists in the spiritual world too4

Are there earthquakes in nature 1 There are iJso moral
and spiritual earthquakes— convulsions which shake society and

* Plato in his Phaedo, speaking of pleasure and pain, says, "If any
perM>n pursues and receives the one, he is almost always under a
necessity of receiving the other, as if both of them depended from one
summit." Phaedo. III.

f See Nat. Hist, of Insects. Family Library, No. VIII. chap. 7.
^ The legionary ant is actually formed to be a slave-dealer, attacking
the neets of other species, stealing their young, rearing them, and thus
by shifting all the domestic labors of their republic on strangers, escap-
ing from labor tbemselves. This curious fact, first discovered by Hu-
ber, has been confirmed by Latreille, and is admitted by all naturalists.
The slave is distinguished from his master by being of a dark ash color,
so as to be entitled to the name of negro. (Formica fusca.)"

} Rom. Gt 16. '* His servants (slaves, dovXol) ye are, to whom ye
obey." John 8: 34. 1 Pet. 5: 8. Eph. ShS

Vol. IX. No. 30. 45

354 The Head of the Chwrdt, [AnMV

the church to their foundatkxis, and threaten to destroy their
very existence.

Some churches sometimes exliibit a most lovely spectacle of
order and harmony and peace. Such was the state of the
church at Jerusalem in its infancy, when no man claimed or
sought any thing as his own, none gloried in wealth, and none
suffered from poverty ; *' and they continued daily with one ac-
cord in the temple, and breaking bread fiK>m house to house, did
eat their meat with gladness, and singleness of heart, praising
God, and having favor with all the people." But it was not
airways so with the church at Jerusalem or other apostolic
churches. It was not long before Paul was under the necessity
of rebuking the church at Corinth for such disorders as were
^^ not even named among the Gentiles," and pronouncing the
members '^ carnal " because of '^ e$i»yingSy strifes and divisions
among them." There was envy and jealousy, cowardice and
treachery in the chosen band of Christ's aposdes. And none
need be told, for every eye hath seen and every ear bath heard,,
how much there now is in the church of that strife, which is ac-^
oompanied with ^^ confusion and every evil work."

In like manner, there b here and there a regular and cheer^
fill family y an orderly and quiet comnmnityy a peaceful and
bappy nation. But how often does confimon succeed order in
these very families and communities and nations ; or if not in
the same, how does it prevail in others around them ? Some*
times the good man prospers and the bad only suffers, but how
often the tables are turned and the order reversed I And oftener
still ^^ one event happeneth to all."

In like manner in the natural world, there are deserts amid
tropical verdure, and oases amid deserts. There is an iEltna
in fertile Sicily, and a Vesuvius threatening the rich fields and
blooming villages, and beautiful bay, of Naples. The tempest
breaks in upon the sunshine, the earthquake succeeds the calm,
and the blazing meteor, the streaming comet and the appearing
and disappearing star seem to disturb the harmony of the higher
heavens. Throughout the divine economy^ strange disorder
and confusion are set over against exquisite order and harmony.

It is a common complaint of deists that there is obscurity in
the Bible, and mystery in the whole scheme of grace. But is
there no obscurity in the deist's Bible, no mystery in the divine
economy, which the deist acknowledges ? Had the economy
of grace, been all light and brightness, it would have been too

1838.] Head over all ningt. 353

unlike the constitutioo and course of nature, to be referable to
the same author. Now^ where in God's works, b there not ob-
scurity and mystery ? I may find such a spot in another world,
but I never have in this. There is light everywhere, but only
enough to make the darkness visible ; and the more light there
is, the more we are sensible of the darkness, just as the larger
the sphere illumined by a lamp in the open air at midnight, the
more extensive is the concavity of darkness, by which it is en-
veloped. There never has been a day in this world, which did
not answer in some respects the description of the prophet : '' It
shall come to pass in that day, that the light shall not be clear
nor dark— not day nor night.'' There is light enough in nature,
providence and grace severally, to guide us in all matters of prac-
cal utility or necessity, but if you would explore further, you
enter the region of darkness. If you look downwards, you can
only penetrate the surface, only examine a few scratches in the
rind of the earth. If you look around you, every mineral is a
cabinet of wonders, every plant a natural labyrinth, every ani-
mal a microcosm of mysteries, and of every element, it may be
said as of the wind, " thou canst not tell whence it cometh, nor
whither it goeth." If you turn your eye upwards, the stars
twinkle very far, but you know not how far above your head,
their dimensi<»is and velocities are very great, but how great in
most cases none can tell, while as to the specific purposes,
which they are made to subserve, you are left to mere con-
jecture.

And the deist's New Testament, the book of providence^ is
there less mystery in that, than in the New Testament of our
Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ ? Then why all those anxieties,
and perplexities and murmurings and repinings, of which the
ooouths of worldlings and the books of infidels are full ?

It is this mixture of good and evil, order and confusion, light
and darkness, which gives such a color of plausibility to the
most opposite views of our worid. Voltaire looks only at the
dark side of the picture, and uses the following language of
complaint. ^' Who can without horror consider the whole
world as the empire of destruction ! It abounds with won-
ders ; it abounds also with victims. It is a vast field of car^
sage and contagion. Every species is without pity pursued
and torn to pieces through the earth and air and water.

^* In ihan there is more wretchedness, than in all the other

3S6 Tkt Head of the Church, [ Apeil

animals put together. He loves life, and yet he knows that he
must die. If he enjoys a transient good, he suffers various evils,
and is at last devoured by worms. This knowledge is his fatal
prerogative — all other animals have it not. He spends the
ti-ansient moments of his existence in difiiisang the miseries he
suffers, in cutting the throats of his fellow creatures for pay, in
cheating and being cheated, in robbing and being robbed, in
serving that he might command, and in repenting of all he does.
The bulk of mankind are a crowd of wretches equally criminal
and unfortunate, and the globe contains rather carcasses than
men. 1 tremble on the review of this dreadful picture to find
that it contains a complaint against providence itself, and I wish I
had never been born."

Paley looks chiefly at the bright side of the picture, and says ;
^^ It is a happy world, after all. The air, the earth, the water,
teem with delighted existence. In a spring noon or a summer's
eve, on whichever side I turn my eyes, myriads of happy beings
crowd upon my view. Swarms of new-bom flies are trying
their pinions in the air. Their sportive motions, their wanton
mazes, their gratuitous acUvity, their continual change of place
without use or purpose testify their joy and the exultation which
they feel in their newly discovered faculties. ... If we look to
what the waters produce, shoals of the fry of fish frequent the
margins of rivers, of lakes, and of the sea itself. These are so
happy that they know not what to do with themselves. ... A
child is delighted with speaking without knowing any thing to
say, and with walking without knowing where to go. The
young are happy in enjoying pleasure, the old are happy when
free from pain." Halyburton in the midst of affliction and in
full view of death looks on the same side and exclaims, " Oh,
blessed be God that I was bom. I have a father and mother
and ten brothers and sisters in heaven, and I shall be the eleventh.
Oh, there is a telling in this providence, and 1 shall be telling it
forever. If there be such a glory in his conduct towards me
now, what will it be to see the Liamb in the midst of the throne !
Blessed be God, that ever I was born."

Now were not the present such a mixed state of things as I
have described, different views might be taken of it, but not
views diametrically opposite^ yet both apparently just and trae.
And God makes use of this very mixture of good and evil to
test and develope and form character. There is such a pre*

1838.] Head over M Tkif^. 35T

ponderance oigoodxxx nature^ as to iiiniish presumptive evidence
of the goodness of its author, but such a mixture of enil as to
give scope for the developement of a heart of unbelief and dis-^
content. There is such a preponderance of order and justice
in the providential government of this world as to create a pre*
sumption, that God is just, but such a mixture of disorder and
wmutice as to afford a strong argument for a future state.
There is such a preponderance of light in the Bible, as to sat-
bfy a reasonable mind of its truth and sacredness, but such a
mixture of darkness as to let the perverse heart wander and
cavil, and despise and perish. It would seem as if God intend-
ed in this universal analogy to present us everywhere with the
most sensible and striking proof, that he reigns alike in the
realms of nature, providence and grace, and that we are now
living in a state of trial, the issue of which will be a state of
unmixed good or unmixed ill in another world. But this leads
me to a seventh analogy :

7. In nature, providence and grace alike, God brings good
out of evil, order out of confusion, light out of darkness.

It has been already intimated, that character is better tested
and developed in a mixed state. There can be no trial of
fiiith, in a world of such efiulgent light, as enforces belief. No
trial of patience, where there are not ills to provoke impatience.
And reason accords with revelation in pronouncing the trial of
these virtues to be more precious than that of silver and gold.

None could avoid admiring a state of perfect order. Vol-
taire, though he might have been of a discontented spirit,,
would not have vented his feelings in such loud and eloquent
complaints, had no disorders or evils met his eye ; and though
Paley might have been benevolent and cheerful, and Halybur-
ton pious at heart, yet they could have given comparatively lit-
tle evidence of such a character, had they never seen any thing
but goodness and happiness in the world around them. In
such a world, the three men could never have seen so clearly
themselvesj or exhibited so conspicuously to others, the radical
difference in their characters.

But more than this is true. A mixture of good and evil is
essential to the formation of a highly excellent or deeply de-
praved character by beings constituted as we are. Our physi-
cal, mtellectual and moral powers are all strengthened by severe
trial and discipline, and to this feature of our own constitution,, the

358 The Bead of the Churchy [Apbil

structure of the world around us is nicely adapted. It is m no
small degree a world of barrenness and thorns, a world of ob-
scurity and mystery, a world of temptation and sin. We may
and do perfect our natures by struggling with, and overcoming
such obstacles. Physical strength is derived, not from the easy
chair in the parior, but from ploughing and hoeing the earth,
swinging the axe or belaboring the anvil. Intellectual power
and acumen are not received without effi>rt in the nursery or the
lecture room, but acquired by delving in the mines and separa*
ting the gold from the ore. Moral and religious principle be«
comes firm and decided, not in the select circle of virtue and
piety, but in the wide world of temptation and sin. Thus the
natural and spiritual worlds resemble, and conspire with, each
other in the developement and formation of character in the
only way adapted to our constitution and state of probation,
viz. by such a mixture of good and evil as shall leave us at full
liberty to choose a right or a wrong course and furnish us at
once the means, which are necessary to aid our progress in the
way of our choice, and the obstacles, the removal of which by
continued effort is necessary to develope our powers and con-
firm our habits.

In the same manner and probably for the same end the sci-
ences have exerted alternately good and bad influences on re-
ligious character. Like the three kingdoms of which they coiw
stitute the history and the philosophy, they are partly light and
partly darkness, and they have shed upon religion, now light and
now darkness. Now they have raised objections, and now they
have removed those objections, and furnished contrary and cor-
roborating evidence. Such has been the history of every sci-
ence, theology not excepted. Accordingly different men have
found in the same science, one nutriment tor his iaith and an-
other support for his skepticism, one the means of perfecting
his excellencies, another of deepening his depravity.*

Another way, in which good is brought out of evil in all the
departments of the divine government, is by the ibcreased value
which good acquires or seems to acquire by contrast with evil.
The fertile field never appears so rich as when contrasted with

* It is not denied, that true science has eomedmes been perverted
into ao engine of irreiigion and immorality, fiut it is moraibequeat-
\j the errors which are engrafted upon the science, that do the dm-
chief.

183B.] Bead <nfer aU TTimgt. 359

the banea desert. How does the hungry and thirsty, weary
Bad wayworn traveller through the interminable prairie or the
boundless Sahara, reve) in the shades and fountuns and fruits
and flowers of the wooded island or the verdant oasis ! None,
but he who has suffered a long confineinent in the narrow
streets and infected atmosphere of a populous city, knows the
luxury of life in the fresh green oountiy •

It is 80 with prcddential good. If you are ever grateiiil for
health, k is when you have visited a hospital and had your heart
wrung with sympathy for the afflicted and distressed inmates ;
and if yoQ ever enjoy the blessings of health with a keen, a pe*
culiar celish, it is when you have yourself just risen from a bed
of painful and protracted sickness. You set the highest value
upon your knowledge, when you view it in contrast with the
ignorance of otherB,or perhaps with your owa former ignoraace.
It is 80 with tpirittud good. When the Christian looks ^^ at the
rock whence he was hewn and the hole of the pit, whence he
was digged," and sees others still cleaving to the hardness of im*
peniteocy and sinking in the mire of pollution, then it is that he
sings the loudest, most enrapturing song of praise to his God
and Redeemer. Heaven is the traveller's resting place and the
prHgrim's home, the warrior's peace and the runner's goal, per-
petual health to the diseased, and eternal life to the dying, con-
firmed holiness to the sinner, and perfected bliss to the misera-
ble ; and tbioogfa eternity the joys of the redeemed will be en-
hanced and their notes of praise swelled immeasurably by look-
ing back upon the sins and miseries of earth, and locking down
upon the torments and blasphemies of hell.''^

But evil is also made throughout the divine government the
direct wieans of preventing a greater evil or accomplishing a
greater good. The volcano is often a terrible scourge to its im-
mediate vicinity, but it gives vent to those internal fires which
would otherwise shake continents and lay waste nations. France

* The songs of the redeemed in the Revelation are chiefly songs
of delweranet \a view of the dreadful and final overlhrow of the wick-
ed. In making such representations, the ininisters of the Oospel and
the sacred writers are often charged with a fiendish delight in the
miseries of others. But it is nothing more, than that joy and grati-
tude, which we always and tueessarUy feel in contrasting our eryoy-
ments with our dtstrtSy our present happiness with our foraier misery,
or our awn weal with the wo of othens.

360 7%6 Head of the Churchy [April

in the last century was a political and moral vdcano. Anarchy
and infidelity broke out there in such fHghtful ravages and ooo-
vulsions, as to put an effectual check upon the risings and heav-
ings of other nations, and to furnish a safeguard to society and
the church in every subsequent age of the world. And who
<;an say, that our world is not the vent of sin for the mcNral uni-
verse, designed to exeit a conservative influence over thousands
of worlds and myriads of intelligent beings through endless ages.*

The lightning and the tempest often ravage the earth and
destroy human life, but they also purify the atmosphere and
prevent it from becoming fatal on a larger scale. So the judg-
ments of heaven reform individuals, purify churches, correct so-
cial habits and improve national character*

The modem Italian derives subsistence and pleasure from the
surface of the lava, that entombed Herculaneum and Pompeii ;
£urope owed the revival of letters not a little to the destruction
of Constantinople ; and the Gentile world were indebted to the
persecution of the church at Jerusalem for the general propaga-
tion of the Gospel. Indeed if there is any truth in natural, po-
litical and ecclesiastical history, convulsions have been a princi-
pal means of fertilizing and beautifying the surface of the earth ;
revolutions, of reforming and advancing society ; and persecu-
tions, of purifying and enlargbg the church. W ho is not struck
with the peculiar wisdom, that originated this plan of operation,
and the 'Symmetry, that extended it to every department of the
divine government ?t

Slavery y that scourge of Africa and curse and disgrace of the
nations that have sanctioned it, has it done no good ? To say
nothing of the conversion and salvation of thousands, that would
otherwise have lived and died m heathenism, what else bas pro-

* That the influence of the fall together untk the scheme of recovery
is not confined to our world, is dear from such passages as the fol-
lowing. Luke 15: 10. Col. 1: 30. 1 Cor. 4: 9. Eph. 3: 20. That it
should aflect all moral beings accords with all our ideas of moral in-
fluence, and to suppose that it does^ gives new grandeur to the scheme
of moral government and to the plan of redemption.

t This feature of the divine government does not justify the radical
reformer, any more than the cruel persecutor. The divine plan may
be wise, and the divine purpose good, while yet there is neither wis-
dom uor goodness in the human agency.

1838.] Head over all Tilings. 861

duced or could have produced that unparalleled sympathy and
excitemeDt in behalf of Africa, which has led so many white
missionaries to breathe her pestilential airs and lay their bones
on her burning sands ; and what else has sent back so many of
her own sons, civilized, enlightened and redeemed to build up
nations on her coasts and spread the blessings of knowledge,
society and religion through the countless heathen tribes of the
interior ?

And the evil one himself, — has he not been the means of
doing good ? He too has occasioned a sympathy in behalf of
his wretched victims through all the heavenly hosts, and ^* there
is joy in heaven over one sinner that repenteth more than over
ninety and nine just persons, that need no repentance.'^ When
he drove on his slaves to crucify the son of God, he helped to
execute a scheme, which the angels desire to look into, and
which all holy beings will study and contemplate with ineffable
wonder, love and joy forever and ever.

The animal Jcingdom, which is sometimes represented as a
mere scene of carnage and cruelty, is a scheme of comprehen-
sive wisdom and goodness ; and the existence of carnivorous
and venomous animals, so far from a blemish, is the wisest and
best and most wonderful part of the scheme. Venomous ani-
mak rarely attack other species except for purposes of defence
or subsistence. Now what more effectual means of defence
against the larger animals could be devised, than their venom*
ous bite or sting; and what other way of destroying their
smaller prey would be so sudden, so easy, and attended with
so little pain !

The destruction of many animals is absolutely necessary to
prevent such a multiplication of them, as would exhaust vege-
tation and subject not only the whole animal kingdom, but man
himself to a lingering, torturing death by famine. Now how
profound, how superhuman is the wisdom, which makes this
necessary destruction, the means of subsistence and happiness
to another class of animals, that execute it in a manner far less
painful to the victims, than the slow tortures of famine, disease
or old age ! But for the comforts of society, the pleasures of
intellect, and the hopes and fears of immortality, it would be
better for man to die in the same way. As it is his reason
which exempts him from the scheme of animal destruction, so
it is his rational and immortal nature only, which renders it de-

VoL. XI. No. 30. 46

362 The Head of the Church, etc. [April

sirable that be should be exempted. Thus witboat any loss on
the whole, but rather the reverse, to the herbivorous tribes, tbe
happiness of the carnivorous species is clear gain to the sum
total of animal enjoyment.*

Now it is a doctrine of christian theology, that the sum total
of moral as of natural good is enhanced by the existence of evil.
We cannot see so clearly how this result is effected in the moral
as in the natural world, hence there is some dispute as to the
manner. But as to the fact, there can be no doubt.f The
Bible implies it,| and we see enough of the process to satisfy a
reasonable mind. The sins and temptations of a wicked world
give occasion for the exercise of some virtues, which could not
otherwise exist, and discipline other virtues to a degree of
strength and perfection, which they could not otherwise attain.
Earth with all its barrenness and thorns and briars, is the very
soil for faith and patience and charity to bloom in and bear their
precious harvest of golden fruit.

Without the existence of evil, there could not be tbe luxury,
to lis unequalled, of contemplating our deliverance and praising
our Deliverer. Tbe beauties of the Redeemer's character and
the glories of redemption could have been exhibited only in a
theatre of sin and misery. Other worlds may owe their con-
tinued allegiance to our apostacy, their further progress in know-
ledge and holiness to our folly and guilt ; and the holy universe
will understand the nature, perceive the beauty, and enjoy the
pleasures of holiness far more than if sin and misery hftd never
existed.

As in the natural world, destruction and pain affi>rd the means
of subsistence and pleasure, so in the spiritual world, sin and
misery furnish nutriment to holiness and happiness ; and as the
happiness of carnivorous animals is clear gain without any loss
to the herbivorous, so without doing the wicked any wrong, the
Head of the church will by tlieir means greatly enhance the ho-
liness and happiness of his people, while he makes a matchless
dbplay of his own wisdom and goodness. Thus he causes all

* For authority and more extended discussion on this subject, the
reader may refer to Paley's Nat. Theol. chap. 26. and Buckland's
Bridg. Treat, cbap. 13.

t Theologians of all parties agree, that evil is in some way, or for
some reason, incidental to the best system.

} Rom. 3: 5—7. 5:20. II: 11, 12, 32, 33, etc.

1888.] Dr. Schmucker's Appeal. 869

the wrath of the elements and animals and men and deTils to
praise him and to work together for the good of the universe ;
and we only need clearer eyes, larger minds and better hearts
to see every apparent evil in every department of the-^divine
government producing real good.

'^ All nature is but art unknown to thee.
All chance, direction which thou canst not see.
All discord, harmony not understood,
All partial evil, universal good.''

[To be oooeladid.)

ARTICLE III.

Fraternal Appeal to the American Churches, to-
gether WITH A Plan for Catholic Union on Apos-
tolic Principles.*

By B. B. Selimoeker, D. D.. Prorenor of nidtctie and Ptotomie TlMolugy ia the Tb«ol. Bern.
ofGaoeral Syood of lh« Luthoran Charch, Gettyaburg, Penn. [Concfuded from p. 131.]

Whilst contemplating the church of the Redeemer from
the time when the Master tabernacled in the flesh, to the

E resent day, we are, as was formerly remarked, forcibly struck
y the contrast between her visible unity in the earlier centu-
ries, and the multitude of her divisions since the Reformation.
During the fonner period, the great mass of the orthodox chris-
tian community on earth, constituted one universal or catholic
church ; excepting only several comparatively small clusters of
Christians, such as the Donatists and Nov^tians. Now, the
purest portion of God's heritage, the Protestant world, is cleft
into a multitude of parties, each claiming superior purity, each
maintaining a separate ecclesiastical organization. The separa-
tion of the Protestants from the Papal hierarchy, was an insu-
Eerable duty ; for Rome had poisoned the fountains of truth by
er corruptions, and death or a refusal to drink from her cup
was the only alternative. " Babylon, the great, was fallen"

* To the substance of this article, which, (as stated in the last No.
of the Repository, p. 86, was prepared a year ago,) a few paragraphs
only have been added in view of more recent events.

364 Dr. SchmucJcer^s Appeal. [Apbil

under the divine displeasure, and 'Uhe voice from heaven'^
must be obeyed, " Come out of her, ray people, that ye be not
partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not her plagues."*
But that the Protestants themselves should afterwards separate
from each other ; should break communion with those whom
they professed to regard as brethren, was inconsistent with the
practice of the apostolic church, and, at least in the extent to
which it was carried, and the principle on which it was based,
detrimental to the interests of the christian cause. But H must not
be forgotten, that the position thus assumed, was, so far as its ulte-
rior results are concerned, rather adventitious than designed. The
Protestant churches struggled into existence amid circumstances of
excitement, oppression and agitation both civil and ecclesiasticaL
This state of things was highly unpropitious alike to the forma-
tion of perfect views of church polity in theory, and their intro-
duction in practice. The Reformation itself, could not have
been effected, unless aided by the civil arm, which protected
its agents from papal vengeance. A total exclusion of the civil
authorities from ecclesiastical action, would probably have blast-
ed the Reformation in the bud ; even if the views of the earlier
Reformers had led them to desire such exclusion. Owing
partly to these circumstance?, and partly to the remains of pa-
pal bigotry still adhering to them, the Protestants in different
countries successively assumed organizations not only entirely
separate, as in some respects they properly might be ; but hav-
ing little reference to the church as a whole, and calculated to
cast into the back ground the fundamental unity which actually
exists between them. Without entering into a detail of their
origin, it may not be amiss, in view of the popular reader, to
advert to the successive dates of their formation.

The Lutheran church grew up with the Refonuation itself,
which commenced in 1517. The early history of the one, in
Germany, Denmark, Prussia, Sweden, and Norway is also the
history of the other. The commencement of the church may
be dated, either from 1520, when Luther renounced his allegi-
ance to popery, by committing the emblems of papal power,
the bulls and canons, to the flames ; or, more properly it may
be fixed at 1530, when the refonners presented their confession
of faith, to the emperor and diet at Augsburg. It is to be re-
gretted, that this eldest branch of the Protestant church adopt-

• Rev. 18: 3, 4.

1888.] Dr. SehmucJcer^s Appeal 365

ed a sectarian name ; thus fostering excessive reverence for the
opinions of an illustrious yet fallible servant of God, erecting
them into a standard of orthodoxy, and making his doctrinal at-
tainments the ne plus ultra of ecclesiastical reformation. For,
the church being termed Lutheran, it was a very popular argu-
ment, which bigots did not fail to wield, that he who rejected
any of Luther's opinions was untrue to the church which bore
his name. Had some generic designation been assumed, and
only generic principles been adopted for the organization of the
church, the work of reformation might have been gradually ad-
vanced until every vestige of popery was obliterated, without
buriing the charge of unfaithfulness at any one. Yet, it is but
justice to that distinguished servant of God to add, that the
name was given to his followers by his enemies from derision,
whilst he protested against it with his accustomed energy. ^' I
beg (said he) that men would abstain from using my name,
and would call themselves not Lutherans, but Christians.
What is Luther? My doctrine is not mine. Neither was I
crucified for any one. Paul would not suffer Christians to be
called after him, nor Peter, but after Christ (1 Cor. 3: 4, 5).
Why should it happen to me, poor, corruptible food of worms,
that the disciples of Christ should be called after my abomina-
ble name ? Be it not so, beloved friends, but let us extirpate
party names, and be called Christians ; for it is the doctrine of
Christ that we teach."

The German Reformed church was next established through
the agency of that dbtinguished servant of Christ, Zwingli. He
commenced his public efforts as a Reformer in 1519, by oppos-
ing the sale of indulgences by the Romish agent Sampson. In
1531 a permanent religious peace was made in Switzerland,
:securing mutual toleration both to the reformed and to the
Catholics, and thus stability was given to this portion of the
Protestant Church.

The Episcopal church may be dated from 1533, when
Henry VIII. renounced his allegiance to the pope, and separated
the church of England from the papal see ; although the work of
actually reforming this church was accomplished at a later date.

The Baptist church may be referred to the year 1535,
when Menno Simon commenced his career; or to 1536,
when it was regularly organized.

The Calvinistic or Presbyterian church, using the phrase to
designate the church established by Calvin himself, may be

866 Dr. Sckmucker^s Appeal, [April

dated at 1536, when be was appointed minister at Geneva, or
more properly at 1542 when he established the presbytery there.

The Presoffterian church in England, Scotland and America,
may be . regarded as a continuation of the church, founded by
th'is eminent servant of God.

The Congregational or Independent church may be dated
from 1616, when the first Independent or Congregational church
was organized in England by Mr. Jacob.

The modem Moravian church or church of the United
Brethren, may be regarded as originating in 1727, when Count
Zinzendorf and Baron Waterville were selected as directors of
the fraternity. Both the Moravian and the Baptist churches
trace their origin to christian communities prior to the Reforma-
tion. But our design is merely to enumerate the dates of the
existing most extensive Protestant denominations; in doing
which, we have selected the earliest periods, in order that read-
ers of no particular church might dissent or feel aggrieved.

The origin of the Methodist church may be traced to 1729,
when its honored founder Mr. John Wesley, and Mr. Morgan
commenced their meetings for the practical study of the sacked
volume.

Numerous other denominations of minor extent, are found
among us, whose principles coincide more or less with those of
the churches here specified. All these together constitute the
aggregate Protestant church, and are the great mass of the visi-
ble church of the Redeemer, engaged in promoting his mediato-
rial reign on earth, and owned by his Spirit's blessing.

Clauses of sectarian strife between the different branches of the

Protestant church.

In continental Europe the sectarian principle is not exhibited
in its full development. There, either the Lutheran or Re-
formed church, and in some instances both are established by
law ; and the number of dissenters, if any exist, is very small.
In England, where a greater amount of liberty is enjoyed, and
the press is unshackled, dissenters from the established church
are far more numerous. But it is only in these United States,
where Christianity has been divorced from the civil government,
and restored to its primitive dependence on its own moral power,
that all sects are on perfect equality, and the natural tendency
of sectarianism is witnessed in its full latitude. The separation
between church and state is worthy of all praise, and demands

1888.] Dr. Schtnucker*s Appeal 367

OUT wannest gratitude to Heaven. It has restored the Ameri*
can Protestant church to the original advantages of the golden
age of Christianity in the apostolic days. In this land of refuge
for oppressed Europe, God has placed his people in circumstan-
ces most auspicious for the gradual ^' perfecting " of his visible
kingdom. Here we are enabled, unencumbered by entangling
alliances with civil government, to review the history of the
Redeemer's kingdom for eighteen hundred years, to trace the
rise and progress of error in all its forms, to witness the effects
of every different measure, and by a species of experimental
eclecticism, rejecting every thing injurious, to combine all that
has proved advantageous, and incorporate it in the structure and
relations of the Protestant church. And has not God, in his

f>rovidence called us to this work ? Has he not, by our pecu-
iar situation imposed on us this obligation ? Ought not every
man, be he minister or layman, who wields any influence in any
christian denomination, strive to rise to the level of this sublime
undertaking, and inquire : Whence originates the strife among
the different branches of the Protestant church ; and bow may
their union on apostolic principles be most successfully effected ?
Among the causes of this strife we may enumerate the following :

1. The absence of any visible bond, or indication of union,
between the different churches in any dty, tovm or neighbor'-
hoody whilst each of them is connected to other churches else-
where of their own denomination. This circumstance constant-*
ly cherishes the unfriendly conviction, that each church prefers
other distant churches to their own neighboring brethren. If
the churches were all independent, having no closer connexion
with any others abroad, than with their neighbors at home,
there would be less occasion for this feelins;. No bond of out-
ward union at all, would be more conducive to brotherly love
among neighbors, than a bond which excludes those around,
us and unites us to others afar off. The effect of this stimulant
to apathy or disregard between neighboring disciples of the
same Saviour is witnessed in our cities, which contain several
churches of the same denomination, united by a common con-
fession and by their Synodical or Presbyterial relations. Hpw
much nearer do the churches of the same denomination feel to
each other, than to other sects not thus connected, though equal-
ly and sometimes more contiguous !

2. The next cause of strife among churches is their separate
organization an the ground of doctrinal diversity. Separate

368 Dr. Schmucker^s Appeal. [April

organizatioD becomes necessary in any association whose mem-
bers are numerous, and spread over a large extent of country.
This is no less the case in church than in state. But the most
natural ground of division aniqng those professedly belonging to
the same great family, and aiming at the same ends, is geographi*
cal proximity ; as is seen in the division of our common country
into States and these again into counties, and as existed in the
christian church in the apostolic age. But when the division is
made according to a principle totally different from thb, when
it is actually made on the ground of difference between certain
portions of this common family ; it constantly holds up to view
^ not only the existence of some difierence, but also the fact, that
this difference is so important, as .to require those entertaining
it to separate from one another. Now as of two conflicting
opinions only one can be true ; it also implies, that each party
regards the other as in important error, and that itself professes
superior purity. This is virtually judging our brother, and per-
petuating the recollection of our judgment by founding on it a
peculiarity in the structure of our ecclesiastical organization.
This circumstance is obviously calculated to beget unfriendly
feelings, and to cherish bigotry ; and its effect will be propor-
tioned to the density and exclusiveness of the organization based
on it. In the primitive church, when no different denomina-
tions of Christians existed, but all professors of Christianity, of
contiguous residence, whether they entirely agreed in opinion
or not, belonged to the same church ; the bigotry and pride of
the human heart found food only in the separate interests of
neighboring churches occupying different ground. But to this
is now unhappily added the conflict of interests resulting fipom
the occupancy of the same ground by two churches, as also the
conflicting interests of separate extended ecclesiastical organiza-
tions, aiming to occupy the same location.

3. The third source of sectarian strife, may be found in the
use of iransjitndamental creeds.* We have already seen that
creeds properly constructed are useful in the church. We be-
lieve it may easily be established, that either in written or oral
form they are essential. They existed in the primitive church
in the latter form, and were productive of good and only good.
They were soon reduced to writing in the so-called Apostles'

* By transfuDclamental creeds we would designate those creeds
which embody not only the undisputed doctrines of Chrisiianity, but
also the sectarian peculiarities of some particular denomination.

1888.] Dr. Schmttcker's Appeal. 369

creed, and served as a bond of union during the first four cen-
turies of the church, among all who held the fundamentals of
truth. But at that time creeds were confined to fundamentals.
Neither the Apostles' nor the Nicene creed amounts to more
than a single octavo page ; and to the whole of the former and
most of the latter ail the dififerent orthodox churches of the
present day could subscribe. That the brevity of these creeds
did not arise from the absence of diversity of views b certain.
It has been proved in a former part of this Appeal, that there
did exist dififerences of opinion, even in the apostolic age, on
some points, regarded by us as highly important. To that evi-
dence, fully satisfactory because derived from God's infallible
word, we would here subjoin a highly important passage from
Origen, to prove that such diversities of opinion continued to
characterize the church from that day till the middle of the
third century, at which time he wrote. The apostolic fathers
also, would afford us important testimony on this point. Their
writings have, indeed, reached us in a corrupted state ; yet
enough remains fully to answer our purpose ; for the difi^ren-
ces which they endeavor to allay must have existed. We shall,
however, confine ourselves to the passage irota Origen, which we
believe has not before been presented to the American public.
Origen, let it be borne in mind, was the most leai*ned christian
writer who had appeared from the time of the apostles. He
was born but eighty-five years after St. John's death, and there-
fore may have seen persons who lived in the apostolic age.
The infidel Celsus had asserted, that in the beginning, when
Christians were few in number, there was unanimity on all
points, but that in bis day, the latter part of the second century
(A. D. 176), they differed on many subjects. The following is
Origen's reply : " But he (Celsus) also asserts, that they (the
primitive Christians) all agreed in their opinions ; not observing
that from the beginning there were different opinions among be-
lievers (Christians) as to the selection of the books to be re-
garded as divine. Moreover, whilst the apostles were yet
preaching, and those who were eye-witnesses were teaching the
things which they had learned of Jesus, there was not a little
dispute among the Jewish believers, concerning those gentiles
who embraced the christian doctrines, whether it was their du-
ty to observe the Jewish rites ; or whether the burden of clean
and unclean meats might not be removed, as unnecessary, from
those among the gentiles who abandon the customs of their fa*
Vol. XI. No. 30, 47

370 Dr. Schmucker^s Appeal. [Apbxl

thers and believe in Jesus. And in the epistles of Paul we per*
ceive that in the time of those who had seen Jesus, some were
found who called in question the resurrection, and disputed
whether it had not already taken place ; and also concerning
the day of the Lord, whether it was just at hand or not ; and
that (admonition) to avoid profane, vain babblings and the op-
positions of knowledge falsely so called, which some professing^
have made shipwreck concerning the faith ; hence it is manifest
that from the very beginning certain differences of opinion oc-
curred, at a time when (as Celsus supposes) the number of the
believers was yet small. Then, when discoursing about the
di&rences of opinion amongst Christians, he upbraids us, saying
that when the Christians became numerous and were scattered
abroad, they were repeatedly split up and cut into parties, each
wishing to maintain their own position, and then (he adds) — di-
viding again, and quarrelling among themselves : until, so to
speak, they agreed in only one thing, that is, in name, if
even for shame's sake they still have this left in common ;
biit that in all other things they differ. To this we re-
ply, that there never has been a subject, whose principles are
of any moment and of importance in life, concerning which dif-
ferent opinions have not existed. Thus, because medicine is
useful and necessary to the human family, there are many dis-
puted points in it, relating to the different modes of curing the
dbeased. Hence different parties (schools or systems) in med-
icine are confessedly formed among the Greeks, and I believe
also among such of the barbarous nations as avail themselves of
the healing art. And again, because philosophy professes to
teach the truth and instructs us in a knowledge of the things
which exist, and how we ought to live, and aims at showing
what will be advantageous to our race, it has many topics of
dispute. Hence in philosophy also, there are very many parties
(systems, schools,) some more and others less distinguished."*
Here, then, we have the testimony alike of the most distin-

• Origenes contra Celsuin, p|». 120, 121. edit. Hoesrhelii.— It i» evi-
dent from the context, and certain from history, that Orijren when
speaking of numerous differences among the Christians of his day,
uses the word ait^tvig to signify diversities of opinion, or syi^tems of
opinions and parties maintaining them, without any separate ecclesi-
astical organization based on them, and without interruption of sacra*
mental and ministerial ecclesiastical intercommunion of the parties.
We have accordingly thus rendered it in the version in the text.

1888.] Dr. Schmitcker^s Appeal. 371

guished infidel and Christian of the second and third century,
to the existence of differences of opinion (not separate ecclesi-
astical organizations) in the christian church ; yet at that time
the only creed which it was deemed proper to use, was that
termed the Apostles' creed. In short, there is no doubt, that
the different so called orthodox Protestant churches, are in re-
ality as much united in the fundamental doctrines of Christianity
as the church in the earlier centuries was. But modern creeds in-
stead of giving prominence to this unity, and preserving it by
adding a few sentences to these venerable ancient confessions,
ip order to exclude the fundamental errors which have sprung
up since the fourth century, are swelled some to fifty and some
to a hundred times their size ! ! Thus they necessarily intro-
duce so many minor points of doctrine and opinion, that few of
the members of the churches professing them do in reality be-
lieve ay their contents ! When the minor points of difference
are embodied in a creed, they become the stereotyped charac-
teristics of a new sect, and enlist in their defence many of the
unsanctified principles of our nature. They become wedges of
dissension to split in pieces the body of Christ, they form per-
manent barriers of division and bulwarks of schism in his church.

4. The fourth cause of alienation among Christians is the
sectarian training of the rising generation. No principle is
more fully established in the philosophy of mind, no fact more
uniformly attested by the experience of ages, than that the irar
pressions of early life are most lasting, that the prejudices of
childhood and youth pursue us through every subsequent period
of life. And whoever faithfully traces to its source the sectarian
alienation of Christians will, we think, be constrained to attribute
much of it to early sectarian training.

How often do not many parents in the presence of their chil-
dren, exhibit their prejudices against other religious denomina-
tions ? How much more frequently do they exalt their own
denomination above all others, either directly or by comparative
allusions ? Are there not some parents, and alas that it should
be so ! some pastors too, who strive more by direct efiR)rt to in-
stil a disregard for others and a preference for their own sect
into the minds of children, long before they are competent to
comprehend or estimate the grounds of the supposed preference ?
What else is this than an effort to sow the seeds of sheer preju-
dice in the tender minds of children ? It is right that the pre-
possessions and antipathies of youth should be not indeed excited^

372 Dr. Schmucker^s Appeal. [krva,

but properly directed ; yet, for the bleeding Saviour's sake, let
the former be enlisted in the favor of Christianity, not of secta-
rianism, and the latter be directed against the enemies of the
cross, and not against those whom we profess to acknowledge
as its friends !

5. The next source of alienation among Christi&ns, is what
may be termed sectarian idolatry or man-worship^ inordinate
veneration for distinguished theologians, such as Luther, Cal-
vin, Zwingli, Wesley and others. What candid man, possess-
ing any extensive acquaintance with the literature of past ages,
can deny that the deference awarded to the opinions and prac-
tice of these men, is altogether inordinate, entirely beyond
what is due to tlie merits of other men, and far above the
measure of their actual superiority. Protestants justly censure
the Romish church for reposing such confidence in tiie authori-
ty of the ancient Fathers, that is, of distinguished theologians of
the first four or five centuries of the christian church. Yet it
may be doubted whether some Protestants have not inadvert-
ently conceded to some of these modern Fathers an influence
somewhat similar, possibly in a few cases even equal in degree.
The names of these good and great yet fallible men, have be-
come identified with certain distinguishing non-fundamental
doctrines which they held, and by which they were distin-
guished fix>m others. Their authority and influence, acquired
by their zeal and success in behalf of the common Christianity,
are thus often used as a shield of protection for these minor pe-
culiarities. The very designation of these peculiarities by per-
sonal names, calls into play sectarian associations, and sinister
feelings, and is a kind of covert appeal to the authority of these
Fathers.

Moreover each sect is prone to cultivate almost exclusively the
literature of its own denomination. Enter the theological schools
or the private libraries of ministers, and you will find that gen-
erally Lutherans and Calvinists and Episcopalians and Baptists
and Methodists, devote most of their time to the study of au-
thors of their own denominations, and this peculiarity may also
be distinctly traced in the libraries of many lay Christians.
Many of these dbtinguished servants of God would have grieved
to think of the sectarian use, which posterity has made of their
names and literary labors. Listen to the language of Luther,
whose name and works were for two centuries especially thus
Employed io Germany for purposes of strife : '^ I had cherished

1838.] Dr. Sdimucktr*s Appeal 918

the hope, that henceforth men would apply to the holy Scrip'
tures themselves, and let my books alone ; as they have now
accomplished their end and have conducted the hearts of men
to the Scriptures, which was my design in writing them. What
profit is there in the making of many books, and yet remaining
ignorant of the book of books. Better far to drink out of the
fountain itself, than out of the little rivulets which have con-
ducted you to it.* — ^Whoever now wishes to have my books, I
entreat him by no means to let them be an obstacle to bis
studying the Scriptures themselves. But let him look upon my
boot^, as I do on the decretals of the popes and books of the
sophists, that is, though I occasionally look into them to see
what they performed, and to examine the history of the times,
I by no means study them under the impression, that I must do
as they teach.f Yet there is reason to fear, that some good
men have by early and long continued training become so much
accustomed to test and value their views, rather as being Lu-
theran or Calvinistic than biblical, have so long been in the
habit of dwelling on the conformity .of their sentiments to those
of Luther, Calvin, Wesley, or some other worthy of the church,
that they would feel deeply distressed and almost lost, if these
names were wrested from them ! In the spirit of sucli sectari-
anism we might commiserate the condition of the primitive dis*«
ciples whose Christianity was based on the Saviour alone!
We might exclaim, " Unhappy Paul, thou hadst no Luther nor
Calvin nor Wesley to glory in, or whose name thou couldst
bear in addition to that of Christ !" But were such the feelings
of Paul ? He might himself have been a Luther, a Calvin, a
Wesley, his name the watchword of a sect; but the noble-
minded Paul would glory only in Christ. He would not allow
the adoption of any sectarian name in the church. Sectarian
names and party divisions he denounced as carnal. ^^There-
lore" (said he) '' let no man glory in men ; for they are all
yours (they are all the property of the whole church), whether
Paul or Apollos or Cephas," (and we may add Luther and
Calvin and Wesley) : all are yours, and ye are Christ's, and
Christ is God's. So then {ovTwg) let a man consider us (me
'and Apollos, etc.) as ministers of Christ and stewards of the
mysteries of God (but not as leaders of parties)."! He would

* Luther's Deutsche Werke, B. 14. 8. 492. f Ibid. S. 490.
t 1 Cor. 8: 31—4: I.

374 Dr. SckmucJcer^s Appeal. [Apbil

have all believers called Christians and only Christians. All
that this name implied he wished to be, and neither more nor
less. Happy 'day ! when this spirit shall return to the church !
Then she may celebrate a jubilee, a glorious jubilee ; and it will
literally be not a centennial, but a millennial jubilee. The last
thousand years will have witnessed but one ! !

Nor would we pass in silence a collateral evil, resulting from
the almost exclusive cultivation of sectarian literature. As this
literature is all of a date subsequent to the Reformation, its pe-
rusal impresses the Protestant laity with the modern origin of
our churches ; and leaves them in almost total darkness as to
our real identity with the church of the earlier ages. Hence
our people are unduly impressed by the Romish claim to supe-
rior antiquity, and an advantage is conceded to papists of which
they cunningly avail themselves. If Protestants selected their
literature promiscuously from among the different sects accord-
ing to the intrinsic merits of the writers, it would tend much to
promote actual unity and mutual esteem among themselves ;
and if, both in their literature and creeds, they gave greater pro-
minence to their identity with the primitive church, they would
make the laity feel their connexion with the christians of the
earlier centuries, and thus nullify the most popular argument by
which papists proselyte Protestant members.

6. Another source of sectarian discord, is ecclesiastical pride.
As long as man is sanctified but in part, this element of native
depravity will more or less influence the disciples of Christ ;
will seek and often find luel even in the sanctuary of Crod.
Each sect is naturally disposed to regard its institutions and its
ministers as the most learned and able, or its members as
most genteel, or its rites most fashionable, its churches most
splendid, or its members the most pious, its pales as far the best
road to heaven. Ministers are tempted to be influenced by the
fact, that they regard their churches as presenting the most con-
spicuous theatre for the display of their talents, or holding out
the fairest prospects of advancement ; their audiences as the
roost intelligent, their support as the most liberal, or as best se-
cured against contingencies. Hence they are in danger of
looking on their less favored neighbors with secret disrespect ;
of cherishing ecclesiastical pride, and having their judgment
warped by it. We do not assert that all ministers or laymen
yield to the influence of this temptation, yet happy is that man,
who, on an impartial examination of his feelings as in the pre-

1888.J Dr. Schmucker's Appeal. 37S

sence of God, stands fully acquitted by bis own conscience !
That caution here is not superfluous, was evidently the opinion
of the great apostle of the gentiles, who having himself repelled
all sectarian honors, gives double force to his admonition :
" These things, brethren, I have Bguratively transferred (applied)
to myself and to Apollos, for your sakes, that ye might learn
by us not to esteem ministers (see v. I.) above what is writ-*
ten (in v. 1. and ch. 3: 5 — 9, 21^ that no one of you may, on
account of one (minister), be puned up against another!"

7. The last source of sectarian discord to be noticed is
conflict of pecuniary interest between neighbouring ministers
and churches. This principle applies to the feelings of the
minister in regard to his salary, which depends in some mea-
sure on the increase of his church. In reference to laymen, it
applies to their raising funds for all ecclesiastical purposes.
The more their church prospers and receives additions, the
more will their pecuniary liabilities be dix^ided, the more easily
will the burden rest on their shoulders. Hence both pastors
and people are tempted to envy and jealousy towards their
christian neighbors of other denominations, because the success
of either party, is more or les^ at the expense of the other*
The success of either, diminishes the amount of materials for
the others to act on, and this is a matter of serious moment to
the parties especially in smaller towns and villages, where often
twice as many ministers are stationed as are needed, or can be
supported.

From this difficulty the primitive church was almost entirely
exempt. In the earlier ages it was customary to appoint, that
is, ordain several elders, or as we now term them ministers, in
every church, who divided the labor between them, and gen-
erally continued to prosecute their secular buriness, thus in a
great measure supporting themselves ; whilst it was customary
from the beginning to provide for those who went abroad as
fnissionariesy and travelled from place to place.*' The only fund
of the church, was that which arose from the voluntary offer-
ings of the members on each Lord's day. This fund however
was considerable ; and it was probably as a stimulus to liberali-
ty, that the custom of reading off the names of the contributors
was introduced ; though its professed design was to commend
them to the special prayers of the church. f In the third cen-

* Fuch's Bibliotb6k der KircheDversammlungeD, Vol. I. p. 72, 7dL
f Ibid. Vol. I. p. 79.

876 Dr. Sckmucker^M Appeal* [Apro.

tury, when the duties of mmisters had become so greatly multi-
plied as to require their entire time, they were in some coun*
tries prohibited from following any secular profession^ as we
learn from Cyprian,*' and other sources* The sixth of the
Apostolic Canons reads thus :

Canon 6. Neither a bishop, presbyter nor deacon shall en*
gage in secular employment y on pain of being deposed from of
Jice.

And the fortieth canon is as follows :

Canon 40. We ordain that the bishop shall have the control
of the congregational property. For as the predous souls of
men are committed to nis care, much more ought he to have the
control of the church property ^ that he may freely arrange w-
ery thing, that he may aid the poor through the instrumentaH*
ty of the presbyters and deacons, in the fear of God and in alt
honesty. He shall also be permitted to apply a portion of it
to his oum indispensable wants, if he needs it, as also for
strange Christiar^ who have come as guests ; and in these cor^
ses it is not necessary to suffer any want (fi€talttf*fiavi$¥ de ««#
aviot^ ztav diovxn^y, iiyt dmxo, iig rag avayxaiac autw %Qi$a9
xoi« x<a¥ inv^tvovfiiifOiv adekqxav, cig xaxa fitidiva xQonov avtovQ
vaifQiia^ai).

The fifty-eighth canon likewise relates to this subject :

Canon 58. If a bishop refuses to supply the indispensMe
Vfants of a poor minister (namely irom the church funds) he
3hall be set aside; and if he still refuses to do it, let him be
deposed as a murderer of his brethren.j[^

At the Synod of Elvira, (in Spain, near the site of the pre-
sent Granada,) the date of which is not entirely certain, though
fixed with probability about the year 313, a restriction was im-
posed on ministers, by the eighteenth canon, which however
presupposes that in Spain the secular business of ministers was
not yet entirely prohibited.

Canon 18. Bishops, elders and deacons shall not lecnoe their
place of residence for the sake of trade, nor traverse the pro^
vinces for the purposes of attending profitable fairs. They
snay, for the purpose of gaining a sutsiste7u:e, send a son, or

* Cypriani ep. 66. to the church at Furnae. Neander, sup. cit p.
305.

f Roller's Kbliotfaek dor Kircbenvliter, Vol. 4. p. 382, 342, 948.

I838J ' Dr. Sdmucker's Appeal 377

4>rfreedmany or kirelingy or friendy or any om else; and if
they tPtsh to pursue any secular business, ht it be urithin their
province.*

Id accordance with these original documents, is the opinioB
of Dr. Neander, who is cmifessedly the most learned writer of
the present age, on the ancient history of the church. ^^ It is
almost certain (says he) that in the beginning, those who held
offices in the church, continued to pursue their secular business,
and thereby supported their famiUes, as they had previously
done. The congregations, which consisted chiefly ot the poor,
were scarcdy able to provide for the support of their ministers
(presbyters) and deacons, especially as at that time many other
demands were made on the congregational treasury, such as for
the support of the destitute widows, of the poor, of the sick,
and of orphans. And it may be that the ministers often be-
longed to the wealthiest members of the church, and indeed
this must often have been the case, as their office required a
degree of previous cultivation of mind and manners, which
could more frequently be found among pers(His in the higher or
middle walks of life, than among the lower classes of society.
If it was necessary that the presbyters or bishops, as they were
in all respects to be an example to the flock, should also have
been distinguished among the Christians for their hospitality
(1 Tim» 3: 2), they must have belonged to those in easy cir-
cumstances, of wlu)m the number was not large, — and bow
could such persons have permitted themselves to be supported
by the savings of their more needy brethren ! The apostle
Paul does indeed declare, that the missionaries who went abroad
to publish the gospel, are entitled to a support from those for
wlK)se spiritual benefit they labor, but we cannot hence jnfer
the same in regard to the officers of ^ individual congregations.
The former could not well unite their secular profession with
the duties of their spiritual calling, although to the self-denid
of Paul even this was possible. But the latter could at first
easily combine their secular profession with their ecclesiastical
office. Nor was Uiere any thing offensive in such a union ac-

■^ ' * ■ ■ .11. .1... I I . I,-. ... I . ... I I I ■ ... ■■! -.^^»^l 111. «

* Ibid. VoL 4. p. S80, 981. Bpiscopi, Presbyteri et D'mcones de
k>ei8 suis negotiandi causa non discedant ; nee circuroeuntes provin«
etas quaesluoaas nundicas secteutur. Sane ad victum sibi cooqairan-
dum aut fiUum, aut libertum, aut mercenarium, aut amicum, aut quem-
libet mittant, et si voluerint negotiari, intra provinciam negotientur.

Vol. XI. No. SO 48

378 Dr. iSchmucker^s Apptal. [Apeix.

cording to the primitive views of the Christians ; fer they were
convinced, that every earthly calling also could be sanctified by
the christian design for which it is pursued, and they knew that
even an apostle followed a secular business whilst engaged in
publishing the gospel. But when the congregations became
larger, and the duties of the church officers more numerous,
when the duty of teaching was chiefly confined to the ministers,
as the office of the ministers required all their time and exer*
tions if they would perform them faithfully ; it was often no
longer possible for them to provide for their own support, and
the congregations having become larger, contained more wealth,
and were now able to support them. The salary of the minis-
ters was paid out of the congregational treasury, which was
supplied by a voluntary contribution from each member at the
meeting for public worship on every Lord's day, or as in North-
em Africa, on the first Sunday of each month. Ministers were
now urged to abstain from worldly busine^ ; and in the third
century they were absolutely prohibited from all such employ-
ment, even from the duties of a guardian. This regulation was
doubtless founded on a very good reason, and was intended for
the very salutary purpose of preventing the clergy from foiget-
ting their sacred calling amid their worldly engagements ; for
we see fi*om the work of Cyprian, de lapsisy that during the
long continued peace, a worldly spirit had already crept in
among the bishops, and that, immersed in secular business,
they neglected their spiritual duties and the welfare of their
churches."*

Such then are the undoubted facts in the case. In the be-
ginning there was not, there could not be any conflict of pecu-
niary interest between adjoining ministers and congregations.
But it is evident, that even after it became necessary for minis-
ter to relinquish their secular business and be supported by
theic congregations which they had a clear right to demand as
^soon as the congregations were large enough to support them,
as Paul distinctly teaches in 1 Cor. ix. scarcely any more diffi-
culty could arise ; because, there being but one denomination of
. Christians, there could not be several conflicting churches aim-
ing to occupy the same ground, and the^^ases would be rare in
which more ministers would be stationed in one place, than the

population required and could support.

■ I 1^—111 1 I ^——1 ■ .11 ,11 III II —^1^ I _

* Neander's AHgemeiRe Geschicfate der christlichen Religion und
Kirehe, Vol. I. p. 303» 304, 305.

1838*] Dr. Schmudcer^^ AppeaL 879

How great the difficulties are, which now arise from this
source is well known. Yet they might be greatly diminished
by the plan of union hereafter pro)K)sed, if, a) the confederated
denominations would resolve not to send into any neighbor-
hood more ministers than would constitute a reasonable supply,
say one to every thousand souls, b) Let all the members of
the confederated churches, resident-in such bounds unite in sup-
porting one and the same minister. And c) if the whole con-
federated population of such a district is unable to furnish an
adequate support for a minister, let application be made to the
Home Missionary Society for aid. Thus would many labor-
ers be spared for destitute portions of our land and of our globe,
brotherly love would more abound in tlie church at home, and
unity of spirit be greatly promoted.

Remedy for these evils, or plan for the restoration of Catholic

Union on Apostolic Principles.

Any plan of union, in order to possess a claim to the atten-
tion" of the different christian denominations generally, must be
based on apostolic principles, must be accordant with the spirit
and principles of the New Testament, or deduoible from them.
It must leave untouched the unalienable rights and obligations
of Christians, and therefore must possess the following attri-^
butes: ^

1. It must require of no one the renunciation of any doctrine
or opinion believed by him to be scriptural or true.

3. It must concede to each denomination or branch of the
church of Christ, the right to retain its own organization, or to
alter or amend it at option, leaving every thing relative to gov-
ernment, discipline, and worship, to be managed by each de-
nomination according to its own views for the time being. The
principle of ecclesiastical associations is scriptural ; the mode of
Its application and the extent of its use» are not decided by the
sacred volume, and therefore are just matter for private judg<*.
ment and progressive expmenoe.

3. It must dissuade no one from discussing fundamentals and
non-fundamentals in the spirit of christian love, and amicably show-
ing why he believes some non-fundamental opinions held by any
of hb brethren to be incorrect.— Controversies might, even exis%
among the confederated brethren^ under the influenceof scriptural

n

380 Dr. Schmucker^t Appeal. [April

union ; but they wcMild be divested of most of their bitterness,
because the points at issue would confessedly be non-/iim/a-
mentaly having litde or no perceptible influence on christian
practice, involving no pecuniary loss by ejection from a pastoral
relation, and menacing no ecclesiastical disabilities.

4. The plan must be applicable to all tite orthodox christian
denominations, to all that ate regarded as portions of Christ's
visible church on earth. It must embrace all whom the apos-
tles and primitive Christians would have admitted to the one
catholic or universal church ; all whom God has owned by the
influence of his Spirit and grace. Upon this ground James,
Peter, and John admitted Paul who had formerly been a perse*
cutor of the brethren, and " gave to him the right hand of fel-
lowship."* The Saviour never enjoined on men the duty of
fixing the terms of communion in his church. This he has
himself doue in his word by precept and by the apostolic exam-
ple ; and we are treading on forbidden ground when we sepa-
rate those whom God by his grace and Spirit hath joined to-
gether. This is indeed not the design of the di&rent denomi-
nati<Kis, but is it not too true, that it is virtually the result of the
present state of sectarinn division ?

Having now considered the character of primitive unity, and
the causes of discord in the different branches of the Protestant
church ; let us take our stand on the high 'ground of apostolic
principles, and from that elevated post survey the dtvided heri-
tage of the Saviour, and inquire how may the spirit, and, as far
as possible, the form of primitive unity be restored ? And may
that blessed Saviour, who promised wisdom from above to them
that ask it, to lead them into all necessary truth, grant us the
tuition of his Spirit to guide and bless this humble eflbrt for the
accomplishment of his own fervent prayer in behalf of his disci-
ples : ** That they all may be one ; as thou. Father, art in
me, and I in thee.'^

I. Some few advocates of union have proposed, that all others
should abandon their systems and peculiarities, and unite widi
them by conforming in all things to their views and practioe.

As this method violates the unalienable rights and obligatiiMis

* GaU 2: 9: M^hen James, Cephas and John, perceived the grace
that was given unto me, they gave to me and Bamabaa the right hand
of fellowship.

1888.] Dr. Sdunu£ker'$ Apptid. 881

of Christians, bj requiring the abandomnent of what they be-
lieve truth, and the practice of what they consider error, it can-
not be regarded as judicious, or as promising any success. It
would, moreover, betray extreme weaiiness for any one christian
sect at this late day, to calculate on the universal adoption of its
peculiarities by all others. Better, &r better will it be, that all
endeavor to forget sectarian differences, and cooperate for the
publication oS the Gospel to the 600,000,000 of perishing
heathen, with a degree of ardor and cordiality, which will make
us wear the appearance of one church.

IL It has been proposed, that each denomination should re-
nounce its standards of doctrine and government and worship,
and then all unite in one new, short confession, embracing only
those doctrines held in common by all, and establishing such a
system of government, as all could conscientiously adopt ; whilst
eotire liberty and privilege of diversity should be enjoyed by all
on every point not determined by the new standards.

This plan is liberal in its principles, violates none of the un-
alienable rights and obligations of Christians, and therefore pos-
sesses claims of the highest order. It lacks but one attribute of
a {MOper union for Christians, on an apostolic basis. The apos-
tles and primitive churches maintained unity with all whom they
acknowledged as Christians ; but this plan, we fear, is not ap-
plicable to all orthodox christian denominations. It would
fromise a union of the Lutherans, the Coogregationalists, the
^resbyterians, the German Reformed, the Dutch Reformed,
the Baptists, and, in short, of all those orthodox denominations,
which hold parity of ministers. The Moravians, or United
Brethren also could unite so fiir as doctrine is concerned, for as
they adopt and have always held the Augsburg Confession,
there would be no difficulty. The same is true so fiir as doc-
trine is concerned, of the Episcopal church, the Methodist and
all other churches which practise diocesan episcopacy in our
lawL But the writer is unaUe to perceive how these denomi-
nations could all unite on any middle ground of church govern-
ment. We must eidier have diocesan bishops oir practise min-
isterial parity ; and any plan, constructed on the principle of
uniformity, must adopt either the one or the other, and could not
enjoin both. But these churches are as orthodox and pious as
any others, and God has as distinctly owned them as his own ;
so that we should feel criminal in virtually pronouncing that un-

882 Dr. Sckmudcer^s Appeal. [Afeil

clean which God has sanctified, were we to advocate, a plan of
union, which would exclude either the friends of ministerial
parity or imparity. But if this plan were even feasible, its adop*
tion would probably not result in much good ; as it would col*
lect into one body for religious worship, those whose modes
and habits of worship are so materially diverse as to justify the
anticipation of but little harmony or edification.

III. Our own plan, which appears to us more accordant with
the requisite attributes of a plan for christian union on apostolic

f)rinciples, more feasible, and more safe, is embraced in the fd-
owing features :

FiBST Feature. T%e several christian denominations shaU
retain each its own present ecclesiastical organization^ govern--
ment^ discipline ^ and mode of worship. It is conceded by the great
body of Christians, that the Scriptures do not determine all the par-
ticulars of any system of church government^ but leave the mat-
ter, excepting some important outlines, to the conscientious judg-
ment and experience of the church in every age, and under
every form of civil government ; and the few who think they
find their entire system of government in Scripture, do not re-
gard it as so essential as to lead them to deny the christian
character of others. Hence every church has an equal right
deliberately to test her forms of ecclesiastical organization by
experience ; and diversity of practice on this point, ought nei-
ther to preclude ecclesiastical communion, nor impede substan-
tial union among the parties. This principle is distinctly avow-
ed in the mother symbol of Protestantism, the Augsburg Con-
fession : " For the true unity of the church (say the confessors)
nothing more is required than agreement concerning the doc-
trines of the Gospel, and the administration of the sacraments.
Nor is it necessary, that the same human traditions, that is, rites
and ceremonies instituted by men, should be everywhere ob-
served.'' * It is indeed true, that whilst many churches have
no connection whatever with each other even though contig-
uous ; others are united together more closely than any of the
apostolic churches were. But the questions whether and when
they shall relax these sectarian bonds, should be left to their
own decision. The evils of too close a union in extended bodies
are beginning to be extensively felt ; and if through the influ-
ence of the impartial investigation, fostered by the kind of union

* Augsburg Confession, Art. VII.

1696.] Dr. Sdimucker^a Appeal 868

proposed in this Appeal, some chuicbes should reliDquish any
features of their ecclesiastical organization, as is entirely possi*
ble ; they have full liberty to reform themselves, and, under the
progressive light of God's providence, gradually, to assume
towards each other and towards the great body c^ the Protes*
tant 6hurch, whatever relation and organization appear to them
best adapted to the millennial age. But the attempt, to unite
ail the churches in our land under the control of one judicatory
of supervision, jurisdiction, and appeal, appears to the writer
neither desirable nor safe. It would be a distinct approxima-
tion to a new hierarchy. Very extensive courts are too cum-
bersome for efficient action, business is retarded, power tends to
accumulation, the rights of conscience are in danger of being
infringed either by statute, or by an accumulated moral influ-
ence which crushes all that refuses to submit to its dictation.

Moreover, so long as men entertain materially different views
of government and modes of worship, it cannot be conducive to
harmony or edification, to press them to unite on any one form*
The attempt to promote union by the immediate abandonmmit
of existing organizations, would seem to be inexpedient also for
another reason. Experience proves it dangerous suddraly to
unsettle the long established habits of the community ; lest
being released from the old, they fail generally to settle down
with firmness on any thing new that is better. But the first
feature of our plan, by stipulating that each denomination shall
retain its organization as l(»ig as it shall see fit, provides against
this danger, and leaves each denomination as an independent
community to watch the efi^ts of the other features hereafter
proposed, and decide for itself how far to accede to the terms
of union, and how long to adhere to them. ' It also provides for
the indulgence of exbting diversities and preferences so long as
they shall continue ; whilst the other features will gradually
tend to diminish them ; thus inviting external uniformity no
faster than unity of spirit and of views has fully prepared the way.
And, finally, this feature would leave untouched the relations,
government and charters of the various religious, theological
and benevolent institutions, whilst the general plan of union
would promote unity of spirit and efficient cooperation among
them all, for accelerating the grand enterprise of the christian
church, to preach the gospel to every rational creature.

Second Feature. Lei each of the confederated denomino'
tiont formaUy resolve for itself not to discipline amy member or

384 Dr. Sdimucker^s Appetd. [ Apxiii

mhiUiery for holding a doctrine belief>ed by any ether denamma'
tion whose christian character they acknowledge, provided his
deportment be unexeeptiotidble, and he conform to the rules of
government, discipline and worship adopted by said, demmmor
tion. This would be actually retaining in good standing all,
whom the apostles would have retained. And yet, such is the
influence of habit and long familiarity with sectarian organiza-
tions, that to some this feature of our plan will appear altogeth-
er impracticable. But if it is so in any portion of the church,
it must be from want of christian charity, of that grace enjoined
by the apostle, "not to judge a brother," (Romans xir.),
from indisposition or inability to obey the apostolic precent^
to receive those who are weak in the faith, bui not to douM^
fid disptiiation. If then it be only our want of charity which
disqualifies us for the adoption of this feature of union, let
us not assail it; but set about reforming ourselves, and en-
larging our hearts, until they cordially respond to the injunction
of the great apostle of the Gentiles, to receive those who are
weak (in our judgment, defective,) in the faith. It b true, the
apostle Peter denounced some as false teachers, and Paul com-
mianded the excommunication of others ; but what were the
crimes or heresies of which these persons were convicted ? If
they were such as all the orthodox churches would unite in re-
garding an ample ground of excommunication, and if in no in«-
stance the apostles enjoined discipline, for a point which any
orthodox denomination would regard as insufficient, then the
apostolic example afibrds full sanction for our plan, because this
is exactly the ground which it assumes, and by its provisbns
all would be excluded whom the apostles would reject ; and is
not that enough ? As to feke doctrine, ,we find Peter denounc-
ing those as false teachers who '^ bring in damnable heresies
(^aTg'iaug avittkilag, destructive heresies or divisions), denying
even the Lord that bought themJ' ^ And, it is scarcely neces-
sary to say, that such errorists would unhesitatingly be excluded
by the terms of the proposed union, as they also were from the
churches of the earlier centuries by the apostles' creed. Peter
denounced Simon Magus as " having neither part nor lot in
this matter," but it was for attempting te bribe the apostles and
believi7^g that the miraculous gifts of (xod could be purchased
with money. ^ The apostle Paul wishes the Ghdatians to cut

1 9 Pet 3: 1. > Acta 8: 9, 10.

1888.] Ih. SchmucJcer^s Appeal 385

off certain persons,^ but they were guilty of having denied the
doctrine of salvation by grace on account of the merits of Christ,
they made " Christ of no effect," * maintaining (probably, not
by inference of others) that men must be *^ justified by the
law;"^ thus ^^ preaching another gospel,"^ and denying a fun-
damental doctrine, held by all the orthodox denominations, that
salvation is by grace, through the merits of Christ. And in his
first epistle to Timothy, the same apostle predicts, that '^ in after-
times some shall depart, (or rather, apostatize inooTi^aovTat) from
the faith. And what was it in them which he denounced as apos^
tasy from the faith ? He himself informs us, that it was giving heed
to seducing spirits," and believing the doctrines concerning (not
devils, but datfAOvlmv demons, or^ inferior deities such as worship-^
ped heroes or saints, speaking lies in hypocrisy, <' having their
conscience seared," " forbidding to marry and commanding to
abstain from meats." Here again it will be conceded, that any
church deserving the name of orthodox, would not hesitate to
exclude any one who should be chargeable with the counts
summed up by the apostle, and so mournfully applicable to the
Romish church. And, finally, the beloved apostle John warns
his readers against some false teachers, whom he styles anti-
christs. But what does he represent them as teaching ? ^^ Who
is the liar, but he who denieth that Jesus is the Christ (the
Messiah promised in the Old Testament) ? He is the anti-
christ, that denieth the Father and the jSon." * And " many
deceivers are entered into the world, who do not confess that
Jestis Christ came into the worlds this is a deceiver and an an-
tichrist."^ Now these, if we mistake not, are all the instances
in which the apostles either expressly enjoined excommunica-
tion for error in doctrine, or denounced the errorists in language
implying, that they ought to be regarded, not as erring breth-
ren, but as apostates from Christianity ; and, as not one of
these errors is held by any of the so-called orthodox churches,
as every one of them is denounced by them, the plan we pro-
pose would reach them all, and thus the rigor of discipline be
quite as great as the apostles enjoined.

In addition to these errors in doctrine, the apostle has enu-
merated a list of practical abuses, as proper causes of ecclesias-
tical discipline, lest a little leaven of sin should corrupt the

1 Gal. 5:12. ^^lA. » 5: 4. '•1:6,8,9.

^ 1 John 2: 33. < 3 John t. 7.

Vol. XL No. 30. 49

386 Dr. SckmucJcw^M Apptd* [knxu

whole church, namely incest,^ fornicatioD, dishonesty in the pur*
suit of wealth, idolatry, railing, drunkenness and extortion. To
this class also belong the apostle's injunction : " A man that is
a schismatic (^aigiti^oy, a maker of divisions or sects or parties
in the church),^ after the first and second admonition reject,"
and that of the Saviour to exclude one who will not hear the
church. Yet as these are not doctrinal aberrations, they are
not afiected by the plan of union, since its first feature provides
that each denomination shall retain its rules of government, dis-
cipline and worship.

And is there no passage in Scripture justifying discipline for
doctrinal errors of a minor grade ? The apostle does indeed
command us " earnestly to contend for the faith once delivered
to the saints." Yet, as he does not specify how we ought to
contend, whether by preaching, or writing, or ecclesiastical dis-
cipline, it is uncertain whether discipline was meant. And ad-
mitting that he also intended discipline, it seems reasonable,
that it should be employed only in defence of those doctrines
which were certainly delivered to the saints ; and he could not
have meant that some saints should turn their brethren out of
the church, for holding sentiments which others whom they
acknowledged to be saints, and who remained in the church,
believed to be a pait of the gospel of Christ. If excommuni-
cation were one of the appointed means for oicertaining the
truth, it might with propriety be applied in doubtful cases. But
the New Testament represents it as a penalty, to be inflicted on
those who have so criminally and materially ftrsaken the path
of truth or of virtue, as to be unworthy of the christian name.
Hence it ought not to be applied in reference to points on which
Christians of equal piety, talent, and grace, are in debate, wheth-
er they belong to the gospel of Christ or not.

That we are not allowed in regard to matters disputed among
Christians, to act as if we were certainly right, is evident firom
the express injunctions of the apostles to the contrary. We are

» 1 Cor. 5: 1 1.

3 This version aflcr much examination neeins to the writer the true
one. It is FUHtained by three-fourths of the best critics, such as Mi-
chaelis, Schleusneri Wnhl, De Wette,Stohz, Heuuiann, Van Ess, Sel-
ler, etc. But should we even n<lupt the common version, the passage
is inapplicable, as the context does not decide what errors the apos-
tle considered herefiies.

» Matt. 18: 17.

1838.] Dr. Schmudcer^t Appeal. i 187

oommaQded to ^< receive him that is weak in the faith (him who,
in our judgmeDt, is in error on some points) ; but not to doubt-
ful disputations (not for the purpose of disputing about his scru-
ples, or deciding on them).^ Again, '^ Let every one be fully
persuaded in his own mind." Again, ** Why dost thou judge
(condemn) thy brother ? or why dost thou set at nought thy
brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment-seat of
Christ.^ Paul warns Timothy against ^^ doting about questions
and strifes of words, whereof come envy, strifes, railings, evil
surmisings (unjust suspicions), perverse disputings of men of
corrupt minus,'' etc.^ Again, '^ Of these things put them in
remembrance, charging them before the Lord, that they strive
not about words to no profit, but to the subverting of the hear-
ers." And again, '^ Follow charity, peace, with them that call
on the Lord out of a pure heart ; But foolish and (anaidinovg)
untaught questions (which had not been decided by the cepos"
ties) avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes."^

We are therefore commanded on the one hand to ^^ cut off
those antichrists who preach another gospel," and on the other,
not to judge (pass sentence, or condemn) him whom, on the
whole, we regard as a brother ; but to receive him and to avoid
foolish and untaught questions, questions not clearly deci-
ded IN Scripture. If we unite these two precepts into one,
they will be equivalent, we think, to the general command to
discipline men for denying what is certainly an essential part of
the gospel of Christ, but not for any doctrine about which ac-
knowledged Christians differ, and which is therefore doubtful.
For we suppose the following rule will be found a fair, safe and
tangible one : That aU those doctrines which the great body of
aU Christians whom Ood has owned by his grace and Spirit;
and who have free access to the Scriptures, agree in finding in
them, are certainly taught there ; and all those points on xvhich
they differ are less certain, are doubtful. This rule is based
on the dictates of common sense, that if the Scriptures are a
revelation from God to man, they must on all points necessary
to salvation, be intelligible to all impartial and competent inqui-
rers ; and that true Christians, who are engaged ita daily efforts
to serve God, and who bear in their hearts and exhibit in their
lives, the evidences of God's grace and Spirit, are the most sinr

1 Rom. 14: 1. « 14: 5—10. « 1 Tim. 6: 4.

4 3 Tim. 3: 14, 23.

388 Dr. SchwuckeT^s AppeaL [Afbii.

cere^ impartial and competent inauirers into his word. Now
we suppose, that the great mass ot true Christians in our land
will be comprehended not in any one sect, but in the aggregate
of all the orthodox protestant denominations.

Again, the judgment of each denomination, as to the most im*
portant points of doctrine taught in the Scriptures is confessedly
set forth by the creed which it professes. Hence those doc-
trines which are taught in common by the creeds of all the so-
called orthodox Protestant denominatioos, and as far as thus
unitedly taught, may be safely regarded as clearly revealed in the
book ot God. We limit the rule to Protestant denominations, be-
cause in the papal sect, the mass of the people have not access
to the word of God, and believe the doctrines of their creed
simply because their church teaches them. It is Jimited to
orthodox denominations, because there are unhappily some in
our land professing to receive the Scriptures, but in reality re-

{'ecting their divine inspiration, and, as we are constrained to
relieve, denying the Lord that bought them, and preaching
another Christ. Let it not be supposed, that this nde resem-
bles tliat of the Romanists, who explain the Scriptures accord-
ing to the pretended unanimous consent of the fathers ; for
those fathers instead of constituting the great mass or majority
of believers in any age, were not one in a million. Nor could
the mass of believers in any age fall under our rule, unless they
bad free and uncontrolled access to the Scriptures, either in the
original, if its languages were vernacular to them, or in a faith-
ful version. It could therefore apply only to the Protestant
churches, and to the churches of the first few centuries before
ecclesiastical enactments interfered with the free unbiassed
use of the Scriptures. And concerning the opinions of the mass
of believers in the earlier centuries, we know next to nothing,
except that they rcceived the so-called Apostles' creed.

We are thus conducted, by Scripture and reason, to the
adoption of the second feature of the proposed catholic union,
namely, not to discipline a hrothery whose deportment is tm-
exceptionahhy and who conforms to our existing regulations of
EovemmetUj discipline and worship^ for holding a doctrine he*
Ueved by any acknowledged orthodox denomination. This
practice, so far as the Scriptures enable us to judge, accords
with that of the apostolic churches ; it certainly agrees with the
practice of the church in the first four centuries after the apos-
tles, for they disciplined only for the denial of a doctrine taught

183&] Dr. SGkmiicker'M Appeal. 889

in the Apostle^', aixl afterwards in the Nicene cr^ed, all of
which are received by every orthodox denominatioD. Not one
of the distinguishing points on which Protestants differ, is deter-
mioed in either the Apostles' oi* the Nipene creed, and therefore
it is indisputable, that any one of these denominations would
have been received and retained (not disciplined) by all other
portions of the so-called universal (catholic) church.

And why ought not the different branches of the Protestant
church to adopt this rule ? That persons difiering on these dis-
puted doctrinal points, but agreeing in their views of church
government, discipline and mode of worship, can live harmo-
niously in the same church, and cooperate c(MrdialIy in the duties
and privileges of church members, is not a matter of mere spec-
ulative conjecture. It is a notorious fact that in every denomi"*
nation there are not a few among the pious laity, living and cor-
dially cooperating in the same church, who differ from each
other, as much as the creeds of the several denominations differ*
The writer has personally known many instances of this kind in-
the Lutheran, Presbyterian and Episcopal churches, and has no
doubt that cases equally frequent occur in the other denomina-
tions. If this can be done by pious laymen, there is no reason
why pious ministers could not live together in the same unity of
spirit, notwithstanding minor differences in doctrinal views ; es-
pecially if they were taught in their theological coursie, them-
selves to regard as less important the several points which
separate the orthodox churches, and in their public exercises to
lay the more stress on the cardinal doctrines of the christian
scheme. It is well known that in the Episcopal church minis-
ters of different doctrinal views exist and labor in friendship.
^' Perhaps" (says the liberal and amiable author of * Hints on
Catholic Union,'') " there is not a shade or variety of theologiciil
opinion, within the circle of evangelical truth, that has not had
an advocate among the divines of the Church of England." In
the Presbyterian church also a large number of ministers have
believed in general atonement, whilst others, agreeably to their
Confession, consider the atonement as limited. Yet these
brethren have generally lived together and cooperated in peace
until recently. At present, for reasons, into which our design
does not urge us to inquire, these di^ring brethren in the Pres-
byterian church are engaged in warm disputations, whilst among

' See Hints on Catholic Union, by h Presbyter of tUef Protestant
Epi:}co|>al Charch, p. 46. New York, 1836.

890 Dr. JSkhmucker^s ApptaL [April

our Episcopal brethren, the same diflferences still exist and are
regarded with christian charity. And why should a Presbyte-
rian, who regards a dissentient Episcopalian or a Methodist as a
brother, condemn the memberof bis ownchurch or ministry, who
holds similar views ? Why shogld any man regard that as heresy
in a Presbyterian, which in a Methodist or Episcopalian, is, accord-
ing to his own judgment, consistent with christian character, and
comports with a life of acknowledged piety and usefulness ? The
only conceivable difference is, that the one may be regarded as vi-
olating the obligation of his creed, whilst the others do not violate
it. This is indeed highly important to the character of the indi-
vidual. No n^an should teach a doctrine which he believes to be
inconsistent with the creed of his church, if he pledged himself
to uphold every individual doctrine contained in it, and if his
promise was not, as some suppose it to be, a promise to receive
the confession as teaching the general system of truth revealed
in Scripture. If there be diversity of opinion as to the na-
ture of the subscription to a creed, whether it binds to every in-
dividual doctrine, or only to the system of truths contained in it ;
this point ought -doubtless to be first settled.^ Whilst it remains
under dispute, every attempt at discipline will be encumbered
lyy a double issue. The friends of liberal construction will un-
dertake to prove, that they have not abandoned the creed
(meaning its general system of truth) ; whilst the advocates of
rigid construction will prove that they have not adhered to eve-
■ ..■■-..■ ..... — , ■ , t . . . ,

^ It has been asserted on the authority of early records that the
principle of liberal construction was adopted near the origin of the
Presbyterian church in this country, and was practised on, and the
fact appears to be established by the testimony of President Davies
recently published in the " American Quarterly Register " for May
1837, p. 316. In an extract from his diary, during a visit to England
in behalf of Princeton College, under date March nineteenth, 1754, we
find the following reply given by Mr. Daviea to Mr. Prior, who in-
quired, whether the Presbyterians in America would admit any per-
son to the ministry, without his subscribing the Westminster Confes-
sion : *'I replied that we allowed the candidate to mention his objec-
tions against any article in the Confession, and the judicature judged
whether the articles objected against, were essential to Christianity ;
and if they judged they were not, they would admit the candidate
notwithstanding his objections. He (Mr. Prior) seemed to think that
we were such rigid Calvinists that we would not admit an Arminian
to communion.'*

r
I

1838.] Dr. Sckmucker^M Appeal. 391

17 incfividual doctrine, and will expatiate on the guilt of viola-
ting the obligation imposed by the confession.

Would it not be far better for both parties to inquire whether
they have a right from apostolic precept or example^ ti^hind
either themselves or others to more than the fundamental tnUh$
of christian doctrine^ and to as many points of government,
discipline and worship as are actually necessary to harmonious
cooperation 7 If the views of this Appeal be correct, then sub-
scription to transfundanoental doctrinal creeds is always wrong,
and if wrong then it ceases to be binding so soon as its impro-
priety is seen, and ought to be retracted, whilst the creed should
be reduced to fiindamentals, or subscription be required only
'' to the fundamental doctrines of the Bible as contained in the
creed." For,. after the failure of extended creeds to produce
unanimity, and after their tendency to cause strife and divide
the body of Christ, have become as certain as any other matter
of historical record ; why should protestants continue to bind
either themselves, or others to them ? Especially, as such ex-
tended creeds were unheard of in the days of the apostles, and
for hundreds of years after ? If the same word of God wbicb
we now possess, when aided by the oral instruction and the
personal example of the apostles, could not produce entire una-
nimity among the primitive Christians, how could it be expected
to effect more at the present time ? or, why should we require
greater unanimity than the primitive Christians did, as a term of
ecclesiastical communion ?

So long as there is the same diversity of talent, of mental
temperament, of habits of education, and of supposed interest,
such diversity will continue to exist. Nor ought it to be re-
garded as necessarily criminal, or as inconsbtent with christian
fellowship and fidelity. EMfference on non-essentials has na
perceptible influence on christian character and practice. There
are differences in other departments of human knowledge, and
some even connected with religion, of equal macgnitude, such as
the value of a death bed repentance, the mode of treating awak-
ened sinners and of conducting revivals, etc., and yet, because
these points are not settled in the creed, men agree to differ on
them, their peace and harmonious cooperation are rarely dis-
turbed for any length of time ; for as Luther justly remarked,
aUa est Concordia fdeif alia charitatis. Such variety of opin-
ions on non-iiindamentals moreover, may even exert a salutary
tendency, may stimulate men to inquiry and peacefiil discussimy

399 Dr. SehmucJcet^t Appeal [Afkil

thus keeping alive a healthful spirit of iovestigation^ and pre*
veotiog the indifierence, which some have apprehended, might
result from the absence of extensive creeds.

Uader the operation of this feature of union, full liberty of in-
vestigation would be allowed within the bounds of fundamen-
tals, without the danger' of exclusion from house and home, or
pastoral charge. And, is it not reasonable to suspect that that
system which cannot trust itself to the full and unbiassed influ-
ence of God's word without the artificial aid of creeds, and
those peculiarities which need to be instilled into the youthful
mind more explicitly than the Bible teaches them, lest they be
lost, are erroneous, are not worth keeping ; and that permitting
them to become obsolete, would only advance the unity of the
church ? Every disciple of Christ ought to be willing to see
the peculiarities of his own denomination cast into the crucible
of God's word, and exposed to the unrestrained action of
Bible truth and Bible principles, in order that the truth of God
might thus be gradually developed in its full purity over the
whole church, the breaches in Zion's walls be healed, and one

?eouliar people zealoua of good works, be raised up to God.
\e writer takes pleasure in being able to cite in support of his
position the opinion of that distinguished servant of Grod, Cal-
vin, whose zeal SigBimst fundamental errorists will not be dispu-
ted^ but whose magnanimous liberality in reference to all but
fundamentals, appears to be but little known and still less ap-
preciated. He even goes much further than our plan of union
proposes, and dissuades from schism^ if a church neglect to dis-
cipline for the grossest immoralities ; whilst our plan proposes,
that in regard to government, discipline and mode of worship,
each one shall, as heretofore, connect himself with that branch
of the church, whose forms he believes best calculated to ad-
vance the kingdom of the Redeemer. His language, in a let-
ter to Farrel, is this: "I only contended for this, that ^Acy
should not create schism in any churchy which, although very
corrupt in morals, and infected with strange doctrines, had
not entirely departed from that doctrine, on which Paul in-
forms Its the church of Christ is founded.^^ ^ And it was in

1 Hoc iiniiin contendebam, ne schismate scinderent qualemcumque
ecclesiam : quie, utcunque eaaei corrupttssima moribufi, doctrioia
etiftin exotic'm infecta, non tameo deaciverit penitus ab ea doctrina qua
eoeleaiain Cbristi fuodari docat Paulus. Calv. Epiat Oppw § IX. p. 6.

1838.] Dr. Schmuckef^s Appeal 398

the same spirit of liberality that, as he himself informs us, he
subscribed the Augsburg or Lutheran Confession of faith, and
declares the points of difference between the Protestant church-
es of his day, an insufficient cause for division.^

Third Feature. Let a creed be adopted .including only
the doctrines held in common by all the orthodox christian de-
nominations, to be termed the Apostolic, Protestant Confession,
and let this same creed be used by all denominations as the
term of sacramental, ecclesiastical and ministerial communion.
To this each denomination would add its present Formularies
for government, discipline and mode of worship, which it might
also change or amend from time to time, at its own option, and
in its own way. Each denomination might also use its former
creed as a book of instruction to whatever extent it saw proper.

The new creed should consist of two parts, a) The so-called
Apostles^ Creed.^ This little formulary has already been
adopted by four fifths of the Protestant church, by the Luther-
ans in the difi^rent kingdoms of Europe, by the Episcopalians
in Europe and America, and by the Presbyterian church in this
country and probably also in Great Britain. The doctrines con-
tained in it are embraced by every orthodox Protestant denomi-
nation on earth. The adoption of this confession would estab-
Ibh the doctrinal idenity of the confederated churches, with that
of the apostoKc age, and of the first four centuries ; which is a
matter of no small moment in the popular mind, and has been too
much neglected by Protestants, b) The second part should be
styled The United Protestant Confession, consisting of a selec-
tion of those articles from the creeds of the prominent Protes-
tant churches, in which all can agree, taking but one article on
each subject. As each of these churches acknowledge the
christian character of the others, they all virtually admit, that the'
creed of each church contains every thing essential on the doc-
trine which any given article treats ; whilst each one believes
the creed of the other to contain minor errors on some points.
Now, if a selection can be made from all the creeds, which wUl
contain an article on every topic necessary to be introduced,
and yet not include any peculiar aspects of doctrines on which
the parties differ; all denominations can evidently adopt it;
for they fully believe it, and have already acknowledged its

1 EpiBt. Schalingio^p. 113. Farello, p. 9. Mason's Plea, p. 182, 18a
' For a copy of this Creed, See page 121.
Vol. XI. No. 30. 50

894 Dr. Sdtmudcer^s Appeal. [Apbu

christian character by acknowledging as brethren those who
profess it. And if in order to complete such a creed, it would
be necessary' to strike out some minor speci6cation8 from anj
article of tfae existing creeds, in order to make it unexceptiona-
ble to all parties, it is evident, that if nothing be added, ail can
still adopt it, because the thing erased must be non-essenUal, as
it is one on which the confederated denominations differ.

It might be thought preferable by some, that a general coun-
cil of the liberal-minded of all denominations should be called to
deliberate and form an original creed, covering the common
ground of the Protestant churches. But the testimony of ex-
perience is not strongly in favor of the probable results of such
a convention. The whole field of theological topics would
have to be passed over, and the discussions entered on anew
which Were passed through in the original formation of the sev-
eral creeds. But by the far simpler plan here proposed, all
these difficulties are obviated. We have in the creed of each
denomination the result of its deliberations on all these points.
Taking these as the separate voices of the different churches,
we can by the principles above suggested, without difficulty
frame one creed, in which these voices shall unitedly be heaid
proclaiming the common fiiith of all God's people. As the
method proposed neither requires nor admits the composition of
a single original sentence, it will not be thought presumptuous in
the writer to attempt the application of his own rules. He has
accordingly formed such a rrotestant confession, and appended
it to this Appeal.

These two parts would constitute the Apostolic^ Protestant
Confession, required by the third feature of the proposed union.
The necessity and advantages of such a creed are evident.

1. In order to keep heretics out of the church ofOod. The
duty of the church to exclude from her communion all who de-
ny a fundamental doctrine, is admitted by all whose union is
contemplated in this plan. The apostle John expressly de-
clares, '' If there come any unto you, and bring not this doc-
trine," (concerning the person of Christ, bis real and not mere-
ly feigned appearance in the flesh, as the gnostics asserted v. 7,
and 1 John 4: 2) receive him not into your house, neither bid
him God speed ; for he that biddeth him God speed is partaker
of his evil deeds." ^ Now in order to bring men to the test,

19 John 10,11.

len.] Dr. iSUbMidter'a Appeal. 896

whose fundamental soundness is suspected, it is absolutely ne-
cessary^ to have a creed, either written or nuncupatory. But
whilst the principle of both is the same, a written creed has
many confessed advantages, and must necessarily constitute one
feature of our catholic union. And having thus enlarged the
ground of christian forbearance, and confined the test to the
truths held in common by the orthodox churches, the utmost
fidelity, and uncompromising spirit ought, and it is believed^
would be displayed, in the discipline and the excommunication
of any and every one, who denies a single doctrine actually
taught (not by mference) in the common preed. One princi-
pal cause of laxity in executbg discipline for doctrinal devia-
tions from the diffirent creeds, is undoubtedly the conviction,
derived from Scripture and reason, that the errors impugned are
too trifling to deserve discipline.

9. Such a creed is necessary y to give prominence to the great ,
acknowledged truths of Chrtstianuy.

a) It has been doubted whether it is possible to give special
prominence to the grand doctrines of Christianity, without be-
coming incoherent, or illogical, or vapid ; but its practicability
has often been demonstrated by facts, and ought therefore not
to be dbputed. The writer many years ago, for some time
attended the preaching in the college chapel at Princeton,
where the professors of the Seminary and College alternately
officiated, all of whom were Calvinists ; yet he rarely heard a
sentiment conflicting with Lutheranism, and very rarely heard
the peculiarities of any sect introduced. The reason is, that
those excellent men, feeling that there were in that college,
students from all churches, were disposed to avoid unnecessary
offence, and yet they dwelt on the whole circle of undisputed
christian doctrine. None who heard them would wish more

^ On this subject we would refer the reader to a ^ Lecture on Creeds
and Confessions/* by Rev. Dr. Miller of PrincetoD, coDtaining many
very sound arguments in fuvor of their indispens^ible necessity to the
purity of the church. Whether the author would consent to the
modifications of the subject proposed in this Appeal, and confine the
doctrinal specifications of the creed to the common ground of Protes-
tantism, we know not. Yet we are almost led to hope so from the
fact that all the cases adduced by him, to show the necessity of in-
cluding non-fiindamental matters in it, are cases belonging to gov-
ernment^ discipline or forms of worship, on which this plan proposes
tiMt the sectarian standarda may be retained.

396 Dr. SchmucJcer^s Appeal. [ArKii*

edifying, practical and profitable preaching. The volume of
Sermons and Addresses by Dr. Green, published soon after he
resigned the presidency of that institution, probably contains
some of the sermons then deUvered by him. Of that volume,
a review was soon after published in the Christian Aijvocate,
and the writer distinctly recollects that the reviewer applauded
the unsectarian character of the discourses, and pronounced
them free from every thing to which Christians of any religious
denomination could with propriety object. The opinion of the
reviewer is cited because the writer has not read the work, and
therefore could not speak for himself. As indisputable speci-
mens of most excellent religious discussion confined to the un-
disputed truths of Christianity, the common ground of the or-
thodox churches, we may cite the publications of the American
Tract Society, and of the American Sunday School Union.
We might cite the Sermons of president Davies, Doddridge's
Rise and Progress of Religion in the Soul, Burder's Village
Sermons, and a number of other invaluable works as substan-
tially confined to the grand, cardinal doctrines of Christianity.
And is it not a notorious fact that these and other similar publi-
cations, are the works which have exerted the greatest influence
in producing the evangelical spirit and enterprise of the present
day ? Has not the blessed Saviour so signally blessed these
works, above all others of a sectarian character, as specially to
encourage their multiplication, not indeed so as to exclude oth-
ers, but to give greater prominence to these ?

b) Prominence ought to be given to these undisputed doc-
trines, because they alone are certainly true. It has been
stated, that the aggregate of doctrines believed by the different
orthodox denominations may be divided into two classes, those
that are believed by them all, and those which are believed by
some and disbelieved by others. As men of equal piety, talent
and learning differ in respect to the latter, it is but just to sup-
pose, that they are not so clearly revealed, and so definitely de-
cided by Scripture) as those po'uits which all agree in finding in
that sacred book. And as they are not so clearly revealed,
they cannot be essential to salvation, nor so certain in themselves,
if our knowledge of them is derived from revelation alone.

Moreover, no one Protestant sect is more numerous than all
the others together. The Lutheran church, which is by far the
largest, numbers according to the best authorities, a population
of about 30,000,000, whilst the whole body of Protestants

1888.] Vr. Schmnckcr^s Appeal. 897

aaK>uBts to about 70,000,000. Hence, it Is evident that the
peculiar, distinguishing doctrine of each sect, is disbelieved by
the majority of Protestants. If a disputed doctrine be common
to several of the larger sects, it then has a majority of all Pro-
testants in. its favor, and the probability of its biblical authority
is augmented. But those doctrines alone can be regarded as
certainly scriptural, which the great mass of all enlightened,
faithful, acknowledged Christians, who have free access to the
Bible, agree in finding in it. These undisputed doctrines alone,
we suppose, can be essential to salvation. For it is acknow"-
ledged by each sect, that persons denying its distinguishing
tenets, do exhibit evidence of piety, and will be saved. Hence,
uniting this judgment of all the sects, Protestants do themselves
acknowledge, that persons will be saved in the denial of each .
of the disputed doctrines. Hence, none but the undisputed
tenets are in fact judged by Protestants to be essential to sal-
vation.

If these views be correct, all christian teachers should accus-
tom themselves to distinguish in their own minds between the
disputed and the undisputed doctrines of Christipinity ; and in
their instructions they ought to give special prominence to the
latter. Who would think of adopting as text-book in a Col-
lege, an author on Chemistry or Natural Philosophy, who intro-
duced the various disputed opinions and theories of a particular
class of men, which he regarded as true ; but did not distin-
guish between these opinions, and those facts and principles
fully established and admitted by all ? Let us go one step
further, and suppose the peculiarities referred to be such as are
regarded as erroneous by the majority of chemists. Such a
book would by common consent be considered unsafe, and be
pronounced unphilosophical. Yet this is exactly the practice
of all the different denominations. Their standards make no
distinction between fundamental and nonfundamental doctrines,
between ihose which are certain, and not disputed by any
acknowledged christian denomination, and those which, though
believed by some, are disputed and disbelieved by others. It
would certainly be conducive to christian union and sound
christian knowledge, if the distinction between disputed and
undisputed doctrines were distinctly made by including the latter
only in the public creed, leaving the former as subjects of ami-
cable difference, and as occasions to exercise that forbearance
required by the apostle, in ^' not judging our broiher.^' For if

396 Dr. SekvMck€T*9 AfpeeL \kt%iu

we introduce these mioor, disputed points into our test, and
then by virtue of it, drive out of our church all who in the least
differ from us, where is there any room for exercising christian
forbearance to a ^^ brother who is weak in the faith." There
will be none such left. We think the great apostle. evidently
contemplated a different practice in the church.

c) Prominence should be given to the undisputed truths of
Christianity, because they are the principal means which e&ctthe
good accomplbhed by all the different sects, the principal means
of conversion, sanctification and salvation. Those pcMnts of secta-
rian diversity which are true, (but which these are, no man can
determine with absohie certainty,) are doubtless more or less
connected with the more important truths, and have some influ-
ence ; yet that their effect is comparatively very small, is mani-
fest from the fact, that the Spirit's operations have been ex-
tended to all these several denominations. The errors of sects
have not destroyed the blessing vouchsafed on the undisputed
truths held by them, nor prevented them from being the vehi-
cle of salvation to thousands. It is therefore not the peculiari-
ties of the Lutherans, the Congregationalists, the Presbyterians,
the Episcopalians or Methodists, which do^ the good accom-
plished by these churches, but that amount of truth held in
common by all. Hence this amount of common truth, ought
always to be distinguished from the ^^ doubtful disputations,"
and especially should be made prombent in the public exercises
of the sanctuary.

d) Such a creed would serve as a hand of unions between all
true Christians over the whole world. Doctrine is, in the
judgment of mankind, far more important than modes of gov-
ernment. It is diversity of doctrine, even on minor points,
which has been adopted as the pretext for the major part of
the divisions and contentions among Christians. The adoption
of the same creed of fundamentab by all, without any altera-
tion, would give prominence to their actual agreement in essenr
tial doctrines, and thus operate as a bond of union among
Christians. Those denominations whose standards approxi-
mate nearest in doctrine, do in reality cherish and exhibit more
fellow feeling than others who agree in fqrm of government, but
differ materially in doctrine. This is exemplified in the inti-
mate union and cooperation which have for a long time existed
between the Coujgregational, the Presbyterian, and the Low-
Dutch churches of our land. Yet there have always been in

1686.] Dr» SAmueker^i AppeaL 899

these coopenitiDg and affiliated cbuicbes, many persons who
differed from each other^ fiilly as much as the creeds of any two
orthodox churches do. The contentions m the church about
doctrine arise not so much from the existence of some diversity
on nonfundamentals, as from the fact, that the majority of exis-^
ting creeds hold up this minor diversity to constant view, and
by ranking the minor and disputed points among the doctrines
which are the test of ecclesiastical communion, they perpetuate
dissension by conveying and cherishing the impression, that
these points are of vital moment. A fundamental creed would
exert directly the reverse influence, and give prominence to
those doctrines which are certainly true, and are not disputed
by any acknowleged christian sect ; whilst it would imply the
nunor importance of the disputed points, and teach men to ex-
eicise charity in regard to tfaenu This was the character of
the Apostles' creed and the Nicene creed, which were the only
creeds used in, the first three centuries of the church as tests ;
and their influence as a bond of union among Christians was
confessedly very great. Now it is a notorious fact, that all the
Protestant churches believe every sentence in these creeds^ and
can subscribe them without renouncing a single opinion. So
far as the sacred records inform us, the apostles themselves did
not require half as much as is contained in these creeds. The
doctrine on which they laid most stress, is '^ that Jesus is the
Son of Grod.'' Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has
come in the flesh is of God." Whosoever confesseth that Je-
sus Christ is the son of God, Grod dwelleth in him and he in
God." Paul to tlie Romans^ expressly says : ^' This is the
word of faith which we preach, that if thou shalt confess with
thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart, that
God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

Concord in fundamentals is the only doctrinal unity which
existed among primitive Christians, and which is necessary.
And in all probability, much greater unity in doctrine never will
exist in the church on earth, unless God miraculously produces
more. But there will be a much greater degree of charity and
fi)rbearance, and consequent unity of spirit, in the days of mil-
lennial glory, and the freedom of investigation and practice that
are advocated in th'is appeal and would be secured by the plan
of union propoaed, will, it is believed, powerfully tend not only
to produce that tmity of spirit, but also to bring about some

^ Romans 10: 8.

400 Dr. SchmucJcer^s Appeal. [April

greater UDity in nonfundamental points, and perhaps in the
forms of government and worship. When Christians shall have
full liberty to change their opinions on minor topics, without
the fear of prosecution, or the apprehension of popular or ec^
clesiastical odium as the primitive Christians had, it seems nat-
ural to expect, that they will form their opinions more exclu-
sively on the naked evidences of the truth itself. But at pre-
sent, the avowal of a change of opinion on some points of sec-
tarian diversity, is in some Protestant churches connected with
such formidable inconveniences, such as prosecution for heresy,
removal from pastoral charge, odium of the brethren etc., that
when a man, and especially a minister, has once connected
himself with any denomination, he finds it very difficult to en-
gage in the investigation of these minor points of his own or
other denominations free from extraneous bias. It may be
said, that good men ought to rise above these influences, and be
unbiassed by such consequences ; but it is far easier to inculcate,
than practise this good advice.

e) Siich a creed might aho be regarded as a standing testV'
mony of the church in behalf of the truth, and against error.
Let it not be said, that it would contain any thing which a por-
tion of Christians regard as error ; for it is to embrace only those
doctrines which all the so-calied orthodox agree in finding in
Scripture. Nor can it in justice be objected, that it would not
be explicit or ample enough ; it would be far more explicit and
five times as ample as the testimony which the church of Christ
during the first four centuries ever bore in this way. Nor do
we suppose, that any satisfactory reason can be adduced to
show, that it is the duty of one part of the church to bear testi-
mony against those opinions of the truth of which, another part
are " fully persuaded in their own minds " and thus to " judge
one another," (Rom. 14: 1 — 8.) or that any good has ever re-
sulted from such testimony.

Fourth Feature. There should be free sacramental, ec-
chsiastical and ministerial commvmon, among the confederated
churches.

The first of these elements, namely free sacramental com-
munion, may be said already to exist among the churches. For
by it is not intended, that the members of any branch of the
Protestant church should forsake the sacramental ordinance of
the house in which they statedly worship. This could be pro-
ductive only of confusion, and eventually would create discord

1888.] Dr. Schmucker'i Appeal. 401

instead of union. And, the writer supposes, that throughout
the whole of this plan there is nothing which ought to create
disturbance or unsettle the affairs of individual congregations of
Christians. But when members of one church are present at a
sacramental celebration in another, a public invitation tq mem-
bers of sister churches in good standing, ought always to be
given, as it happily is in most churches, and ought to be, as it
now generally is, accepted. On this topic, the practice of the
churches already coincides with our plan, and no alteration
would be desured, excepting that the few churches which have
not yet given this public invitation, should also adopt the prac-
tice of their brethren.

By ecclesiiistieal communion, we mean that a certificate of
good standing in any one church should be a certairi passport for
(^mission to regular membership in any other. This element
also may be said already to exist in the different branches of the
church. Yet its real import is not always understood, nor its
legitimate consequences loUowed out in practice. Christians
should regard themselves as members of the church universal as
well as of any particular denomination. Hence, wher^ remov-
ing to other places, although they naturally and properly con-
nect themselves with their own denomination if there be a
church of the kind in the place ; yet if there be not, they ought
to connect themselves with any other christian church which
comes nearest to their views of truth and duty, and in which
they could receive and communicate the greatest amount of good.
How melancholy is it that persons, professing to be Chris-
tians, living in villages and neighborhoods where there is not and
cannot be a church of their denomination, remain ten or twenty
years, and often for life unconnected with the disciples of the
same Redeemer around them, on account of difference on minor
points of diversity. How still more distressing the thought that
ministers of that blessed Saviour who prayed, that all his disci-
ples might " be one," should sometimes confirm the prejudices
of such individuals in the hope of some ultimate far distant gain
to their sect !

By ministerial communion, we would mean that a certificate
of good standing in the ministry of one church, ought to be a
passport for admission to the ministerial ranks of any other
church, if connected with a credible profession of attachment to
the standards of government, discipline and form of worship in
the other ; and if the judicature applied to, believe the applicant

Vol. XL No. 30. 51

40S Dr. Sehmucker^s AppeaL [Apbil

possessed of the qualifications, gifts and graces required by said
standards, and calculated to be useful in the midst of them.
This feature also exists in the practice of most of the churches.
It is not at all unusual for ministers of the Congregational, Presby-
terian, and Low Dutch churches to transfer their relations. Be-
tween the Lutheran and the Moravian churches in this country
the same is the case. Several of our most respected and use-
ful ministers were trained in the church of the United Brethren
and transferred their relations to our larger and more destitute
Zion. Ministers coming with good credentials from the Evan-
gelical church in Germany, apply indifferently either to the
Lutheran or German Reformed church in this country, and are
received by both. As the spirit of christian union increases, we
suppose these cases of transfer will probably multiply ; and that
it will cease in any case to be odious for a minister, at any tiq|p
of life, to transfer his relations to another church either from
want of employment in his own, or because on more mature ex-
amination, or observation of their practical effects, he believes
the forms of the latter more scriptural or better calculated to ad-
vance the kingdom of Christ.

Ministerial communion also implies the mutual acknowledge-
ment of each other'^ official character by the clergy of the con-
federated churches. On this point it may be thought some dif-
ficulty would exist in the minds of some of our Episcopal breth-
ren. This difficulty, if it exist at all, must be confined to the
bigh-church party, and does not embarrass those who embrace
episcopacy, not from the belief of its scriptural authority, but on
the ground of expediency ; and of this class far the largest por-
tion of that church has always been. To this class have belong-
ed archbishop Whitgift, Dr. Willet, bishops Bilson, Morton,
Jewell, Croft, Burnet, Dr. Whitaker, archbishops Usher, and
Tillotson, Drs. StillingfleeC, and Hawies, Sir Peter King, and
the venerable Dr. White, late bishop of the Episcopal church
in Pennsylvania, as well as, if we mistake not, the great mass
of Episcopal divines and laity in this country. In a pamphlet
of the last named respectable author, published many years ago,
principally to recommend a temporary departure from the line
of episcopal succession, on the ground that bishops could not
then be had, he uses this language : ^' Now if even those who
hold episcopacy to be of divine right, conceive die obligation to
it not to be binding, when that idea would be destructive of
pnUic worship ; much more must they think so, who indeed

1888.] Dr. Sdmucker^s Appeal 408

venerate and prefer that form as the most ancient and eligible,
but vfithout any idea of divine right in the case. This the au-
thor believes to be the sentiment of the great body of Episco-
palians in America, in which respect they have in their favor
unquestionably the sense of the church of En^laniy and as he
believes the opinion of her most distinguished prelates for pie^
etyy virtue and abUities.^^ But we have no doubt, that even
our high-church brethren do in spirit (though not in form) ad-
mit the ministerial character of other clergy ; and we take plea-
sure in being able to cite the opinion of Dr. H. IT. Onderdonk,
bishop of the Episcopal church in Pennsylvania in confirmation
of our belief. There will therefore be little if any difficulty
from this source. See his Tract on ^^ Episcopacy tested by
Scripture," p. 6.

Fifth Feature. In all matters not relating to the govern^
mentf discipline and forms of worship of individual churches f
but pertaining to the common cause of Christianity , let the
principle of cooperation regardless of sect ^ be adopted so far
as the nature of the case taiU admit and as fast a^ the views of
the parties wiU allow. The Scriptures present us with no ex-
ample of regular organization fdr extensive benevolent opera-
tions. The church is thus left to choose in view of the princi-
ples of the New Testament, and the results of her own progres-
sive experience. The forms of christian associated agency in
the benevolent enterprises of our day, are usually distinguished
as voluntary and ecclesiastical. This designation, however,
seems not to be entirely accurate ; for the ecclesiastical are also
in one sense voluntary, and the voluntary are ecclesisastical, in-
asmuch as they are conducted by members of the christian
church. More properly at least in reference to the subject un-
der discussion, they might be distinguished as. catholic and
denominational. Now as the denominational are based on the
principle of sect, which we have found so detrimental to the
Redeemer's kingdom ; it is evident that those who would labor .
for this unity and aid in accomplishing the Saviour's prayer,
should so far as the nature of the case admits, prefer those cath-
olic institutions, in which such as profess to be brethren are
found acting out their profession. That these catholic institu-
tions exert a most benign influence in mitigating the rigors of
sectarian asperity and in knitting together in love the hearts of
those engaged in them, can be doubted bv no one acquainted
with the history of the American Bible, IVaot, Education and

404 Dr. ScJmucker^s Appeal. [Apru.

Mi^iooary Societies. That they are at least as efficient as the
denominational organizations, and have enjoyed at least as signal
evidences of the divine favor, will also not be disputed. If the
parent or national societies be supposed to have too great a con-
centration of power, let coordinate branches be multiplied and
be as nearly independent of the parent institution as experience
may prove to be desirable, and each branch mainly do the work
within its own bounds. Yet the branches also should be catho-
lic in their structure, should embrace all such individuals and
congregational societies within their designated bounds, as are
willing to cooperate among the different denominations.

But it by no means follows, that denominational societies must
of necessity be whdly sectarian in their operations. They are
so only when their funds are applied exclusively to the propa-
gation of Christianity connected with the sectarian peculiarities
of the church with which they are connected ; when beneficia-
ries are selected exclusively irom the members of that denomi-
nation ; and are sustained only when having in view the minis-
try in that church. The spirit of catholic union leads us to
rejdce at the progress of the Master's kingdom in any of its ac-
knowledged forms, and to be willing to aid an individual to labor
in any portion of the Lord's vineyard, rather than that he should
not enter the vineyard at all. Let those, therefore, who prefer
denominational societies, and desire to promote the unity of
Christ's body, adopt the catholic principles of action, and enter
into some rules oi cooperation and non-interference with the
other societies, and although not so entirely favorable to Cathol-
icism as the purely catholic institutions, they would be hailed
by the friends of union as fellow-laborers in the common cause
of apostolic Catholicism.

In addition to the superior tendency to union in the catholic
or voluntary associations, they enable individual Christians
and congregations in their primary capacity, themselves to-ap-

!)ropriate their funds immediately to such purposes as they pre-
er, without the intervention of ecclesiastical bodies. This may
lead Christians generally to feel their responsibility more sensi-
bly, to inquire into the merits of different christian enterprises
more fully, and thus to become more deeply interested in them.
In order the more perfectly to secure to the catholic associa*
tions their ecclesiastical and orthodox character, it might not be
amiss for the parent institutions and primary branches to incor-
porate in their constitutions an acknowledgement of the Apoi-

r

1888.] Dr. Schmucker't Appeal. 405

toUc Protestant Confeesiany requiring a subscriptioD to it fipom
all their principal executive officers, their beneficiaries and their
missionaries both foreign and domestic* These societies are
even now amply secured on this point by their regulations,
which reqiure, that every beneficiary shall be member of some
christian church, and that every missionary sent either into the
domestic or foreign field, shall be in regular connection and good
standing in the ministry of some orthodox denomination. Still
as the proposed creed is a catholic one, there would be a con-
gruity in its distinctive acknowledgement by catholic societies,
and it would tend to give still greater prominence to the com-
mon faith.

Sixth Featuke. The Bible should as much as possible be
made the text-iook in aU religiow and theological instruction.
It is incontrovertible that in consequence of the great abundance
even of good uninspired works, the book of God in its naked
form just as its author made it, receives less attention than it
merits. We would not, of course, object to elementary books
for the instruction of children and youth ; yet it seems desira-
ble, that they contain only the common ground of christian
doctrine. Many of the books, employed in training the rising
generation, are tinctured by sectarian peculiarities, whilst others
are professedly sectarian, and cannot fail to leave impressions
unfriendly to the cause of union. Every denomination must
indeed have full liberty to use such works for purposes of: in-
struction without being upbraided : yet it cannot fail to be per-
ceived, that the unity of Christ's body will be best subserved
by occupying the attention of children mainly with the ground
and common truths of our holy religion, by preferring elementary
books of an unsectarian character, and by the early use of the
Bible as the chief book of study and instruction. It is moreo-
ver due to that blessed volume, that it should not only be called
the best of books, but also treated as such ; and be made use of
on all suitable occasions, not so much with the view of estab-
lishing, by detached, quotations, positions already made out,* as
for the analytic study of the book itself. For this cause Bible
classes are deserving of high commendation, even admitting that
disputed points are sometimes discussed. The scholar is still
employed in the direct study of the word of God, and will learn
to judge for himself. Those books of instruction, such as the
Bible questions of the American Sunday Schod Union, which

406 Dr. Schtnucker^s Appeal. [Aprii.

require the scholar unavoidably and constantly to refer to the
Bible for answers, are peculiarly appropriate.

In theological seminaries also the Bible should as much as
possible be made the subject of direct study on all the different
branches of theology ; and on every topic the student should
be required to search the Scriptures for himself, and present
the results of his examination. This course is in a greater or
or less degree already pursued in many of our principal schools
of the prophets. Yet it is probable, that it might be carried to
greater extent. In Biblical History, in Doctrinal, Practical and
p^oleroical Theology this plan can be employed with the utmost
facility, and its undoubted tendency is to obliterate sectarian
prejudices and distinctions, and to promote alike christian union
and Bible truth. The more we can fix the attention of the
student to the word of God, the better shall we be able to raise
up a generation of ministers disengaged from the shackles of
sectarianism, and firmly planted on the broad platform of the
Bible ; men possessing the most enlarged views of the Re-
deemer's kingdom, and ready to devise and execute millennial
schemes for its advancement.

The seventh and last Feature, of union is that him-
iionaries, going into foreign landsy ought to use and profess
no other than this common creeds the Apostolic Protestant
Confession, and connect with it whatever form of church^gov^
emfnent and mode of worship they prefer.

For the sake of our bleeding Saviour, our sectarian divisions
ought not to be carried to heathen lands. The Protestant
churches amount to but sixty millions out of seven hundred
millions, the probable population of our entire globe, and ought
not to spread the Corinthian contagion of sectarianism over the
gentile world. In view of all the divisions and contentions,
which sectarianism has entailed on the heritage of God, how
much better would it be, that the disciples of the Lord, in-
structed by the experience of three hundred years of discord in
the household of faith, should settle down on some bettejr plan
for preserving the unity of the church, as her triumphs are ex-
tending into heathen countries ! The signs of the times impe-
riously call us to this duty ; and a more convenient season can-
not be expected in the providence of God. Deeply impressed
with the conviction that something can, and therefore something
ought to be done, the writer, whose attention has for many

1888.] Dr. Sckmucktf^t Appeal 40?

years been directed to this subject, felt constrained to address
this fraternal appeal to the American churches. Whether that
Divine Saviour, who has promised to be with his'dis6iples unto
the end of the world, will incline the hearts of his children to
beed this appeal, the future must develope. But whether or
not, the writer feels, that he will have discharged a solemn du-
ty, and he cannot resist the conviction that some good will ac-
crue to the kingdom of the blessed Saviour. It is certainly
supremely desirable that the unity of the church should be re-
stored in christian lands, and that the sacramental host who bear
the standard of the cross into the heathen world, should present
an undivided front« Better that the heathen should never hear
of Luther, and Calvin, and Arminius, and Wesley, and base
their religion purely on the Bible, than that the sectariai^divis*
ions connected with these names should be carried among them,
still to vex, and agitate and paralize the church.

Whilst the entire pagan world is before them no two sects
ought to send missionaries into the same district of country.
Thus the immediate collision of sects would be prevented for a
season. Yet if they take with them their extended sectarian
creeds, it will not be long before dissenters from it, will grow
up among their own disciples, and thus the old evil soon return.
But if a creed covering only the common, undisputed ground
of Christianity betaken, there will be no need of disciplining any
but such as ought to be excluded from all christian cburcheS|
and therefore could not form any christian sect. And as the
Scriptures present us with no entire detailed system of chuich-
govemment, our predilections on that subject are produced
chiefly by the influence and example of parents and teachers,
and there is little, very little probability of secession from any of
the churches in heathen lands, on this ground.

In addition to these fundamental features of the projected
anbn. Christians should endeavor gradually to restore unity or
mutual acknowledgement in nafne, as well as m the thing.
Oeographical names should be adopted for all catholic or vol-
untary associations, which may be erected. In this respect the
American Education, Tract,Bible, Missionary and other societies
have set a noble example. Each denomination should speak
of itself not as the church, but as a branch of the church. How
delightful would it be, to hear Christians habitually employing
pbraiseology indicative of their unity, and to hear them speak <^

408 Dr. Schmucker^s Appeal. [April

The Lutheran Branch of the chuicb,

The Episcopal Branch of the church.

The Presbyterian Branch of the church,.

The Methodist Branch of the church, etc. etc«
Thus would we literally verify the declaration of the Lord's
prophet, '^ And the Lord will be king over all the earth ; in
that day there will be one Lord and his name ont!^ Zech. 14: 9.
As to one Suprem/t Representative Body, having even limit-
ed jurisdiction over all the confederated bodies, for which some
may have been looking as a feature of this plan of union — there
was none such in the apostolic age, and we peed none. The
tendency of such bodies is naturally to an increase of power —
they are the foster-mothers of papacy, and dangerous to true
liberty of conscience.

Should any circumstai^ces in the Providence of God, here-
after render it necessary, and the great body of the confederated
denominations unite in the call, a mere advisory council might
be convened, consisting of a small senatorial delegation, in equal
numbers fron(i each denomination, without legislative or judicial
power, its advice to be confined to the general interests of the
Redeemer's kingdom. Yet even such a council ought not to
meet statedly nor often, and forms no part of the proposed union*

The Apostolic, Protestant Confession,

{or which the reader is now prepared, is nothing more than a
selection of such articles or parts of articles, on the topics de-
termined by the several confessions, as are believed by all the
so-called orthodox churches. Not a single word is altered or
added. The authority of this confession is based on the (act,
that every sehtence, every idea of it, has been sanctioned by
one or other of the Protestant conventions that adopted the
creeds from which the articles are selected, and by the denomi-
nations receiving those creeds. The whole creed has therefore
already received the ecclesiastical sanction of acknowledged
churches. Its sanction in its present form and for the propo^
sed purpose, it can only receive by the successive action of such
ecclesiastical bodies, and churches and individuals as in the
Providence of God may receive it, and publish their assent to it,
not as renouncing any of their former opinions, but as regarding
this as the test for discipline and conmiunion.

1838.] Dr. Schmucker't Appeal 409

The Apo8toliC| Protxbtant CoNrEssiON.

Pabt I. I%e Apostles' Creed.

*^ I believe in God the Father Almighty, the Maker of hea-
ven and earth : And in Jesus Christ, his only Son our Lord ;
who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, bom of the virgin Ma*
ry, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead and bu-
ried.— ^The third day he rose finom the dead, he ascended into
heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of God the Father Al-
mighty, fix)m thence he shall come to judge the quick and the
dead.

** I believe in the Holy Ghost, the holy catholic or universal
church ; the communion of saints ; the forgiveness of sins ; the
resurrection of the body, and the life everlasting.''

Part II. 7%e United Protestant Confession.

Art. L Of the Scriptures.

The Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to sal-
vation : so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be
C roved thereby, is not to be required of any man, that it should
e believed as an article of the faith, or be thought requisite or
necessary to salvation.^ Under the name of the Hofy Scrip-
tures, or the word of God written, are now contained all the
books of the Old and New Testament, which are these :

Genesis,

Nehemiah,

Obodiah,

Exodus,

Esther,

Jonah,

Leviticus,

Job,

Micah,

Numbers,

Psalms,

Nahum,

Deuteronomy,

Proverbs,

Habekkuk,

Joshua,

Ecclesiastes,

Zephantah,

Judges,
Ruth,

Songof Solomcm,

Haggai,

Isaiah,

Zechariah,

I. Samuel,

Jeremiah,

Malachi,

n. Samuel,

Tiamentations,

Matthew,

L Kings,

Ezekiel,

Maik,

n. Kings,

Daniel,

Luke,

I. Chronicles,

Hosea,

John,

n. Chronicles,

Joel,

Acts of the Apostles,
Epistle to the Bomans,

Ezra,

Amos,

^ Articles of the Episcopal church, Art VL and of the Discipline
of the Methodist church, Art. V.
Vol. XI. No. 30 62

410 Dr, Sdmucker^s Appeal. [Apbil

I. Ck>riathiaiiB, II. ThessalooiaDs, I. Peter^

n. Corinthians, I. Timothy, 11. Peter,

Galatians, 11.' Timothy, I. John,

Ephesians, Titus, II. John,

Philippians, Philemon, HI. John,

Colossians, Hebrews, Jude,

I. Thessalonians, Epistle of James, Revelation.

All which are given by inspiration of God to be the rule of
faith and life. The books commonly called Apocrypha, not
being of divine inspiration are no part of the canon of the Scrip-
ture.*

Art. II. Of God and the Trinity,

Our churches with one accord teach, that there is one God,
eternal, incorporeal, indivisible, infinite in power, wisdom and
goodness, the creator and preserver of all things visible and in-
visible ; and yet, that there are three persons, who are of the
same essence and power, and are coeternal, the Father, the
Son, and the Holy Spirit.^

Art. III. Of the Son of God and the Atonement.

They likewise teach, that the Word, that is, the Son of God,
assumed human nature, so that the two natures human and di-
vine, united in one person, constitute one Christ, who is true
God and man ; bom of the virgin Mary ; and truly suffered,
was crucified, died, and was buried, that he might be a sacrifice
for the sins of men.^

Art. IV. Of Human Depravity.

God having made a covenant of works and of life thereupon
with our first parents ; they, seduced by the subtilty and temp-
tation of Satan, did wilfully transgress and break the covenant
by eating the forbidden fruit.^ By this sin they fell from their

* Ratio Dtsciplinne or CoDStitution of the Congregational Churches,
Art. I. § 2. 3. and Confession of the Presbyterian Church, Art. I. § 2.
3. The Calvinistic Baptists are supposed generally to agree in the
views of this Confession, though they have not formally adopted it :
and the Confession of the Dutch Reformed Church is also of the same
general doctrinal import.

S Lutheran and Moravian (United Brethren's) Confession, Art. I.

' Idem, Art. III. according to the translation contained in the wri-
ter's ** Popular Theology." ^ Congregational, Art VI. 1.

1838.] Dr. Sehmucker^s Appeal. 411

original righteousness and communion with 6od^ and so became
dead in sin.^ They being the root of all mankind, a corrupted
nature is conveyed to all their posterity descending from them
by ordinary generation.^ The condition of man after the fall
of Adam, is such,^ that his will is neither forced, nor by any ab-
solute necessity of nature determined to do good or evil : ^ but
it does not possess the power, without the influence of the Ho-
ly Spirit, of being just before God.*

Art. V. Of Justification.

We are accounted righteous before God only for the merit of
our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by faith ; and not for our
own works or deservings.^ This faith must bring forth good
firuits ; and it is our duty to perform those good works which
God has commanded, because he has enjoined them, and not in
the expectation of thereby meriting justification before him.^
Good works cannot put away our sins, and endure the severity
of God's judgment.^

Art. VI. Of the Church.

The vbible church, which is catholic or universal under the
Gospel (not confined to one nation), consists of all those through-
out the world, that profess the true religion, and is the kingdom
of the Lord Jesus Christ. Unto this catholic, visible church,
Christ hath given the ministry, oracles and ordinances of God.^
For the true unity of the church, it is not necessary that the
same rites and ceremonies, instituted by men, should be every-
where observed .^^ The purest churches under heaven are
subject both to mixture and error ;^^ nevertheless, Christ always
bath had and ever shall have a visible kingdom in this world to
the end thereof, of such as believe in him and make professioa

* Presbyterian, Art VL 2. ^ Congregational, Art VI. 3.

' Episcopal, Art X. * Presbyt and Congreg. IX. K

^ Lutheran and Moravian Conf. Art XVIIf.

* Episcopal Conf. Art XI. and Methodist, Art IX.
^ Lutheran and Moravian Conf. Art. VI.

^ Methodist Discip. Art X. and Episcopal Conf. Art XIL
9 Presbyterian Conf. Art XXV. 2. 3.
^^ Lutheran and Moraviao* Art. VII.
11 Presb. XXV. 3. and Cong. XXVI. 3.

of his name. ^ There is no other head of the church but the
Lord Jesus Christ : nor can the pope of Rome in any sense be
the head thereof.*

Abt. VII. Of the Sacraments, Baptism and the hordes

Supper.

The sacradlents were instituted not only as marks of a chris-
tian profession among men ; but rather as signs and evidences
of the divine disposition towards us, tendered for the purpose of
exciting and con6rming the faith of those who use them.^
There be only two sacraments ordained by Christ our Lord in
the Gospel^ that is to say, Baptism and the Supper of the
Lord. ^ Baptism is ordained not only for the solemn admission
of the party baptized into the vbible church ; but also to be
unto him a sign of the covenant of grace, of regeneration, of
remission of sins, and of his giving up unto God through Jesus
Christ, to walk in newness of life. * The supper of the Lord
is not only a sign of the love that Christians ought to have
among themselves ; but rather b a sacrament of our redemption
by Chrbt's death. ^

In this sacrament Christ is not offered up, nor any real sacri-
fice made at all, for remission of sins of the quick or dead ; so
that the popish sacrifice of the mass, as they call it, is most in«
jurious to Christ's one only sacrifice. ^ That doctrine which
maintains a change of the bread and wine into Christ's body and
blood (commonly called transubstantiation) by consecration of a
priest, or in any other way, is repugnant not to Scripture alone,
but even to common sense and reason.^ The denying of the
cup to the people, and worshipping the elements, or carrying
them about for adoration, are all contrary to the institution of
Christ. •

1 Congregational Conf. Art XXV I. 3.
■ Congr. XXVI. 4. and Presb. XXV. 6.
' Lutheran and Moravian Conf. Art. XII L

* Presb. Art. XXVII. 4. and Congr. XXVIII. 4.
» Presb. Art. XXVIII. 1.

« Methodist Disc. Art XVIII. and Epbc. Art XXVIII.

7 Presb. Art XXIX. 2. and Cong. XXX. %

0 Presb. Conf. Art XXIX. 6. and Cong. XXX. 6.

• Presb. XXIX. 4. Cong. XXX. 4.

1838.] Dr. Schmueker't Apptai. 413

Art. VIII. • Of Purgatory^ etc.

The Romish doctrine conceniing purgatory, worshipping as
well of images as of relics, and also invocation of saints, is re-
pugnant to the word of God. ^

Abt. IX. Liberty of Conscience.

God alone b the Lord of conscience and hath left it free from
the doctrines and commandments of men^ which are in any
wise contrary to his word, or beside it in matters of faith or
worship. So that to believe such doctrines or to obey such
commandments out of conscience, is to betray true liberty of
conscience ; and, the requiring of an implicit faith and an ab-
solute and blind obedience is to destroy liberty of conscience
and reason also.^

Art. X. Of Civil Government.

God the supreme Lord and king of all the worid, bath or-
dained civil magistrates to be under him, over the people, for
bis own glory and the public good ; and to this end hath armed
them with power, for the defence and encouragement of them
that do good, and for the punishment of evil-doers.^ The pow-
er of the civit magistrate extendeth to all men, as well clergy
as laity in things temporal ; but hath no authority in things
purely spiritual.^ Christians ought to yield obedience to the
civU officers and laws of the land : unless they should command
something sinful ; in which case it is a duty to obey God rather
than man.^

Art. XI. Communion of Saints.

Saints are bound to maintain an holy fellowship and commun-
ion in the worship of God, and in performing such other spirit^
ual services as tend to their mutual edification : As also in re-
lieving each other in outward things, according to their several
abilities and necessities; which communion, as God offereth
opportunity, is to be extended to all those who in every place
call upon the name of the Lord Jesus.^

1 Methodist Disc. Art. XIV. and Episcopal, Art. XXII.
« Presb. XX. 3. ' Cong. XXIV 1. and Presb. XXIII. 1.

^ Episc. XXXVII. ^ Lutheran and Moravian, Art XVI.
• Cong. XXVII. 2. and Prwb. XXVI. 9.

414 Dr^ Schmucker^s Appeal. [AnuL

Art. XII. Of the Future Judgment and Retrihution.

At the end of the world Christ will appear for judgment, he
will raise the dead, he will give to the pious eternal life and
endless ioys ; but will condemn wicked men and devils to be
punished without end.^ As Christ would have us to be cer-
tainly persuaded, that there shall be a day of judgment, to de*
ter all men from sin ; so will he have that day unknown to
men, that they may shake off all carnal security and be always
watchful, because they know not at what hour the Lord will
come, and may be ever prepared to say, Come, Lord Jesus,
Came quickly. Amen?

MoD& OF Operation.

It only remains that a few words be said as to the manner in
which this plan could with very little delay be adopted by all
who approve of its principles and are desirous of cooperating in
restoring unity to the body of Christ.

The call of a general convention of all the friends of the
cause would probably not be expedient nor extensively suc^
cessful ; u<x indeed is it necessary.

I. Let the friends of union, be they benevolent individuals
or associations, extensively circulate this appeal among the dif-
ferent churches, minbters and laity.

U. Let the friends of the cause invite the different ecclesias-
tical bodies to which they belong to investigate the plan, and
so soon as they approve of it adopt it each for itself and resolve
henceforth to act upon it.

IIL If any orthodox denomination find in it a single article
or sentence or idea, which positively, (not by inference) teaches
what they regard as error, let them strike it out, and adopt the
residue. The writer is however not aware that such a clause
is found in it. Other denominations would then also omit it as
a disputed point, not belonging to the common ground of Pro-
testantism, and the residue remain as the United Protestant
Confession, regularly adopted by the confederated denomina-
tions.

IV. Let vacant churches, and Christians of difierent denomi-
nations in destitute villages and neighborhoods be encouraged

1 Lutheran ond Moravian Conf. Art XVII.

' Presbyterian, XXXIIl. 3. Congregational, XXXII. 3.

1638.] Dr. SchfMuiker's Appeal. 415

to unite in adopting the Apostolic Protestant Confession, and
plan of union, and join in calling a minister of any one of the
confederated churches.

v.. Let each of the confederated denominations and mission-
ary societies both voluntary and denominational resolve not to
send a minister into any village or neighborhood already ade-
quately supplied by a minister from another branch of the union,
but advise their members to unite with their confederated breth-
ren in supporting the minister already stationed among them,
or some other one of good standing in either of the confederated
denominations, in whose support they can agree.

VI. Whenever the confederated population of a district is
unable to support a minister, let application be made to the
proper oflScers of the missionary society of their choice, for such
aid as they may need.

VII. Let the education and missionary societies of the con-
federated churches confer with each other, adopt rules of co-
operation, and resolve with renewed ardor by the help of God
to supply every destitute place in our land with faithful minis-
ters, and labor with re-doubled zeal in the definite enterprise of
sending the Gospel to every rational creature throughout ** the
field of the world."

This plan would tend to produce unity of spirit first, whilst
It will prepare the way for greater unity in external forms ; if
the Lord designs to effect it. If its prominent features were
faithfully carried out, the Protestant church would present as
much external unity of organization, as that of the apostolic age,
and therefore in all probability as much as is desirable ; whilst,
happy consummation ! the members of the Saviour's body would
again have the same care one for another ; and whether one
member suffer, all the members suffer with it, or one member
be honored, all the members rejoice with it ! and the intellect of
the christian church would no longer be expended in internal
contentions, but all her energies be directed to the conversion of
the world.

In conclusion, we would commend this humble, well-meant ef-
fort to the blessing of that divine Saviour, who has watched over
his church amidst all the vicissitudes of her history. If this plan is
accordant with his will, may he graciously accept and prosper
it ; and if not, may he defeat it, and at the day of final account,
regard with favor the upright intention from which it has ema-
nated!

416 Mosaic origin of the Pentateuch. [Apbil

ARTICLE IV.

Causes of the Denial of the Mosaic Origin of the

Pentateuch.

TrftodaUd from the Gernan of Prof. Hennteabrrf of Berlin, by S«t. E. BalliDtiMi Awb-
tant loitroctor in the Union Tfaeol. Soni., i'rtnco Edward, Virflaia.

Introductory Notice, by the Translator,

[The following article is a translation of the greater pordoo
of the Prolegomena to the last work published by Hengsten-
berg, entitled Autheniie des Pentateuchs, Bd. I. (Authenticity
of the Pentateuch, Vol. L^ This work is another step in pros-
ecution of the author's design of giving to the world a complete
work on Introduction to the Old Testament. The general title
of that work is Beytrage zur Einleitungins Alte Testement
(Contributions to Introduction to the Old Testament), of which
this is the first part of the second volume. The first volume
was upon the Authenticity of Daniel and the Integrity of Zech-
ariah. The author takes up his topics not in regular order, but
as he judges them to be called for by the state of things. He
thus gives the course and order which he has chosen for the
discussion of his subjects (Vorwort zur Authentie des Daniel
und der Integritat des Sachaijah) : *' the antiquity of Job, the
age and credibility of the books of Chronicles and Esther, the
sources of the historical books, the allegorical interpretation of
the Song of Solomon, etc., and afterwards, if the Lord give life
and health, all other lopks of Introduction ; so that these Bey-
trd^e when completed, may, with the help of copious synopses
and indexes, serve as a Manual of Introduction." May the
Lord speed his work. — ^Those who are acquainted with the
fundamental investigations of Hengstenberg are prepared to ex-
pect in the work before us one worthy of the subject. The
call for such a work may be inferred fjt>m the author's state-
ment of the diflferent opmions on the authorship of the Penta-
teuch, infia pp. 31 — 38. Its design is, to vindicate the Mosaic
origin, and so the historic truth, of the Pentateuch. This vol-
ume refutes the objection made to its Mosaic origin fixHn the
supposed later discovery and use of .the art of writing ; proves
the existence of the Pentateuch in the kingdom of Israel by the
Samaritan Pentateuch, and quotations of and allusions to the

1888.] iaroductary Notice. 417

Pentateuch in the books of Kings, Hosea, and Amos ; and by
a fundamental investigation into the signification and mutual re-
lation of the different names of God, and the use of them in the
Pentateuch, shows that that book is the connected woi-k of one
author. The chapters on the Samaritan Pentateuch, on the
Names of God, and on the history of the Art of Writing, would
if translated, be interesting and useful Articles for the Reposi-
tory.

The course of the whole discussion on the authenticity of
the Pentateuch is thus indicated by the author (S. LXXXIl^ :
^' After the settlement of th6 preliminary question on the rela-
tion of the genuineness of the- book to the history of writing, it
must be proved from the unity of object and plan, of circum-
stances and of language, that the Pentateuch is a closely con-
nected whole, which could have been produced only by one
author. (Here belongs our investigation on the Divine names.)
Then it is to be shown that in the work itself, Moses is desig-
nated as the author. Then we must inquire how the whole
after development of the people, and their literature, stands re-
lated to the Pentateuch. For if the Pentateuch is from Moses,
it must have formed the basis not only of the civil but also of
the religious life of the people. (Here belongs the chapter on
the relation of the Pentateuch to the kingdom of Israel.) Then
it is to be shown that the internal character of the Pentateuch
is not opposed to the genuineness, but rather necessarily suppo-
ses it. Here are to be examined the philological, the historical,
and finally the theological character of the Pentateuch. As
Appendix, it is to be shown that the testimony of Christ and his
apostles, as well as the relation of the Pentateuch to Divine
revelation as a whole, is all in favor of its genuineness. This
appendix is of course designed only for those who on the sub-
jects of revelation and inspiration agree with the author."

The Prolegomena to this work, the greater part of which is
contained in the following Article, are designed to show the
causes why the Mosaic origin of the Pentateuch has been deni-
ed. The author shows convincingly that these causes have
been any thing else than want of proof for the genuineness.
In pointing out these causes, he has given us a striking and in-
teresting history and character of Rationalism or rather of infi-
delity in Germany. He has pointed out the position occupied
by many of the leading men of Germany of the last and the
present century, and has shown the weakness and the danger-
Vol. XI. No. 30. 53

418 • Mosaic Origin of the Peniateueh. [Ai^Bii

ous tendencies of the reigning speculative philosophy of Germa-
ny. The interesting fact that all the historians ot note maintain
the historical character and credibility (at least in the main) of
the Pentateuch — ^and the remarks upon internal and external
evidence, are themselves of sufficient importance to claim the
. . attention of our religious public, and affi>rd to all interested in
the state of religion in Germany, ground of cheering hope. And
when God raises up such able and fearless defenders of the Bi-
ble as Hengstenberg, it may be inferred that he is designing
good for his Israel there. The pledge which the author gives
(p. 31, note), while it strikingly shows on what strong ground
be feels himself to be, is well calculated to diminish our respect
for the reigning opinions and learning of Germany. Can we in
happy America behold this champion thus earnestly contending
for the Bible, and not be interested — ^not pray for him. — ^Trans-
lator.

Causes of the Denial of the Mosaic Osigin of the Pentatettch.
Shallow and Skeptical Interpretation,

It is by no means our object to give a complete external his-
tory of investigations on the genuineness oi the Pentateuch.
A commencement has been made to such a work by Harttmann ;
and it would be of little use to correct and enlarge his collec-
tions of names, titles and short summaries of works. It is bet-
ter to pass over every work which has not had a strong influ-
ence on the course of the contest, and which was only a repe-
tition and a re-arrangement of what had been advanced by oth-
ers, not the result of original and profound investigation. Other-
wise we might be in danger of not seeing the forest on account
of the multitude of trees.

We attend then only to the substance of the history. Our
object is chiefly to show why it is that the genuineness of the
Pentateuch, which had before been considered as scientifically
established, has for the last sixty years had to suffer so many
attacks, and has been contested and denied with so much bold-
ness and so great success.

We designedly give to our inquiry these narrow limits. Scat-
tering attacks upon the genuineness of the Pentateuch, it is well
known, were made as eariy as the seventeenth century. The

1838.] SOiaUaw Md Skeptical htefpretatum. 419

hisloiy of these attacks, in which Spinoza acts the principal
put, may be seen in Carpzavy Introd. L p. 38 seq., and in
WUsius, An Moses auctor FenUU»j in his Miscell. I. p. 102 seq.
But if we succeed in accounting for the opposition to the Pen-
tateuch as now fully developed and in well understonding its
own character and bearings^ it will be easy to show the causes
of those first feeble attempts.

We will consider in the first place the character ofcommemr
tation on the Pentateuch in the tiroes preceding the crisis.^—
A book such as the Pentateuch is, will be regarded as genuine
and authentic no longer than it is expounded as an inspired one.
If it is read as a profane work, if its depths are not fathomed, if
its meaning is diluted and weakened, then the belief in its gen-
uineness has also received a blow ; and if that genuineness is
not immediately denied, this is simply an inconsistency, which,
since every tendency of things must in the long run arrive at
its result, will in time give way. [f the Pentateuch does not
stand above all human productions in regard to its doctrines and
its spirit, if these are not regarded as the greatest miracle it ex-
hibits, if recourse b had to bold and forced apologies for gross
violations of probability; then the miracles and prophecies
which the Pentateuch records will no longer save its credit, but
will serve to hasten its downfall. Defenders of the Bible upon
merely external evidence have no right to demand that we ex-
amine the truth of miracles and prophecies just as we do that
of any other fact. The pagan miracles would not be worthy
of credit even if reported by those in whom otherwise we have
every reason to place confidence. If we place the credibility
of the Mosaic and of the heathen miracles upon the same ground
(of external evidence) by leaving out of view the moral excel-
lencies of that with which the former were connected, and thus
overlook the finger of God in them, we can then no more com-
plain of those who make these very miracles a reas<»i for deny-
mg the genuineness of the Pentateuch.* This indeed would

* Even Heagstenberg then raaiDtaios the idea that the supernata-
ral iacta of the Bible history are not, considered aside firom their con-
nection with Bible doctrines, capable of being subetantiated by his-
toric evidence. Hume went only one step further, and denied their
credibility even when thus connected. It is difficult not to feel that
such an idea when held by one who believes as Hengstenberg does,
that these supernatural events did actually happen, is perfectly absurd.
The external evidence for the miracles of Moses and of Jesus is so^

420 Moscde Origin of the Pentateuch. [April

be to contend not for the Pentateuch, but for a fiction of oar
own which we have substituted for it. And he also who fights
' against this, attacks not the giant himself, but only his shadow,
a bug-bear standing in his place.

The close connection of a belief in the genuineness of the
Pentateuch with a correct and profound exposition of it, appears
at once from this, that the first weak attacks on its genuineness
had their ground in an utter incapacity of interpretation. In
the Clementine Homilies (Patres apostoL ed. CoteL T. L) the
Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch is denied on account of a
number of difficulties which have no existence except for the
crudest understanding. It is there said, viz. that God cannot
lie, cannot tempt, because this supposes ignorance, that he can-
not repent or be grieved, that he cannot harden the heart, that
be, the All-sufficient, can desire no offering, cannot please him-
self with lambs, etc. Comp. especially homil, 2. 6. 43. 44.*
The Pentateuch as thus unconsciously falsified by this author
was most certainly not genuine.

With Calvin the theological exposition of the Pentateuch
reached its highest point — I mean i^atively. He stands much
higher above those that followed, than above those that preced-
ed him. It is indeed wonderful how such a man could have
such successors* Doubtless, it is to be explained only by the
fact that they left him entirely unread — ^a fact which is indeed
every where manifest. It is impossible that he who has tho-
roughly studied Calvin should be so settled and consistent in
shallowness of exposition as they show themselves throughout
to be. We will here notice only the three men who have ex-
erted the most extensive influence — Spencer ^ ClericuSf and J.
D. Michaelis, Others who had the same tendency, as Orotius^

fieient to warrant the credence of one who is entirely ignorant of their
character and doctrines as religious teachers. The internal evidence
is not, therefore, however, either less convincing or iroportanL — Ta.

* See also 6. 52. where the author says, it cannot be true that Noah
was drunk, that Abraham bad three wives and Jacob ybur, and that
Moses was guilty of manslaughter — a remark that falls of itself as
soon as we understand the object of the author not according to our
own notions, but as it appears in his work. For then we should see
fit the commencement of the work, this motto standing : " Lord, to
Cfaee belongs the honor, but to us shame and confusion, that the weak-
nesses of thy chosen ones, do, as far as they can consist with virtue in
liie heart, promote, instead of defeating the object of the w^Nit."

1838.] Shalbw and Skq^iieal Interpretation. 421

and Marshamy either have not carried it through so consistently
or did not make the exposition of the Pentateuch a subject of
special attention ; so that the marks of their influence are lost
in that of their leaders.*

Spencer, f whose labors in the exposition of the Pentateuch
lie before us in his work de legibus Hebraeorum riiualilmsy has
in this day found a fellow-spirit in Strauss.X There is in both
the same acuteness, united with such an incredible want of
depth that one is often tempted to regard their acuteness itself
as doubtful. In both the same icy coldness, the same impotence
in a religious point of view, the same virtuoso-^rit, so to speak,
in repressing all pious feeling, so that even the faintest religious
emotions do not show themselves in them, to interrupt the per*
feet carrying out of their principles. In both, the same clear-
ness and precision of representation, which indeed, are so much
the easier to attain the more the understanding becomes isola-
ted and brings into subjection the other faculties of the soul.
There b this difierence between the two, that Spencer was
satisfied with operating against Revelation, at a single point.
This difierence however is accidental, and is caused only by the
difierence of the times in which they lived. One cannot free
himself from the thought, that were Spencer now living, he
would lay aside this modesty ; nay, that he even, then thought
far more than he said. Another difierence — ^in reference to
learning — ^is still more incidental and unessential.

The very fundamental idea of Spencer's book shows how in-
capable he was of expounding the sacred writings — how these
under his hands lose all their spirit and have nothing left but the
dead letter. This idea — in the main correct, though by him

* The view given of these men here must of course be partial.
Their merits in other respects have nothing to do with our present
'object ; and if not mentioned, are not at all intended to be denied.

t John Spencer, D. D. bom 1630, died 1693, Master of Corpus
Christi College, Cambridge, and Dean of Ely. His work noticed in
the text, is, according to Prof. Tholuck, calcalated in the highest de-
gree to prepare the mind for Rationalism.

X Author of a ''Life of Je8up,"in which he makes out the Ghspe! *
history to be made up of fabfes and religious mythi. See infra, pp.
25/27, 39. This work has been answered by Tholuck in his ' Gktub-
wdrdigkeit d. tvangelisehen GesehiehU^ (Credibility of the Gospel His-
tory), Hamburg, 1837, a book which in many respects deserves to
stand by tbe-side of Paley's Horae Paulinae.

43S Mosaic Origin of the Pentaieuch, [Afbu.

carried much too far — ^is, that much in the ceremonial law of
Moses shows a striking coincidence .with the religious usages of
heathen nations, especially of the Egyptians. This coincidence
IS only in the form ; and there is not the least difficulty in ex-
plaining and justifying it, as soon as it is shown that the spirit
of the Mosaic economy, which animates this external form is
one entirely new. • It is perfectly natural that for the external
representation of that which is really sacred, forms should be
chosen which have been already in long and established use for
the representation of that reputed to be so, and which have thus
themselves acquired a sacred character. Who thinks of draw-
mg any conclusions unfavorable to Christian baptism fix)m the
fact of religious ablutions having been in use among the Jews
and all other nations of antiquity ? But this difference of spirit-
that on which all depends— Spencer was incapable of seeing.
To him the ceremonial law of Moses is a body without a souL
He admits in some parts of it, it is true, a mystical and typical
character (ratio mystica et typica)^ but only in a few cases, and
he declares this to be a subordinate, not the great design of the
ritual. Hence, even the moderate and mild Pfaff^ in his dit"
sertatio pradiminaris to his edition of Spencer's book, says :
*^ You will say that the author said this by way of gratuitous
concession, and that he might not appear to deny the typical
character of the ritual altogether."* But even when he admits
a spiritual meaning, he accounts for it by referring to an entirely
external cause. Heai; him — '^ it is probable that God in the law,
did deliver some sacred things covered up under the veil of
types and symbols, because of a similar custom in use among
the wise men of different nations and especially the Egyptians.^f
In general, however, he sees no difference at all between the
heathen usages and those of the Israelites which externally cor-
responded to them. God adopted the heathenish usages as
they were, in order to afford his people that entertainment and
amusement which they would otherwise have sought in idolatry.
This is expressed as grossly as possible for example on p. 640:
" God in the mean time that he might in every way prevent

* " Dicis saltern gratia et ne rationeni typicam prorsus eliminare
videatur, dizisse hoc videtur auctor."

f Verostmile est, Deum sacratiora quaedam, synibolorom et typo-
rum veils obducta, in lege tradidiase, ob morem affinem, inter gentium,
Aegyptiorum praecipue sapieatea uaitatum."

1^8;] ShaOow and Skeptical hterpretaium* 423

superstition, adopted not a few rites made sacred by the use of
manpr ages and nations and which he knew to be tolerable
folheiJ'* — He every where speaks of the ceremonial law with
the most contemptuous expressions. This is indeed very natu-
ral as long as the prayer ' Lord ! show me wondrous things out
of thy law/ is not made and therefore never answered ; espe*
cially in the case of those who have too high an opinion of
themselves not to consider their not seeing a thing as proof that
it does not exist. Compare for instance p. 26: ^^ No reason
can be given why God should choose to burden the Jewish peo-
ple with so many useless laws and rites as almost to bury under
th^m intellectual worship, except that he might by that heavy
yoke prevent the people from leaping the bounds of their duty^
and' rushing into the religious observances of the heathen. For
it b admitted and manifest, that rites of this kind have no affini-
ty with the character of God, and that such an apparatus of
ceremonies is not necessary to the cultivation of piety."t — ^The
connection between the inability to expound and the denial of
the genuineness of the Pentateuch is here very plain* If the
ceremonial law is understodd as being a perfect contrast to that
worship of God which is in spirit and in truth, instead of being
a preparation for it, the outward shell, a lower form of it, then
indeed nothing can be more absurd than to ascribe its origin to
God : much more obvious and natural would it be in that case
to say that it passed over from the heathen to the Jews in a
purely natural way. And this the rather as in the Pentateuch,
God by no means speaks of these rites as follies, but rather
places them on equal footing with his moral law, and threatens
and commands to punish the non-observance of them with the
severest penalties. Otherwise we cannot avoid bringing against
God the charge otufraus pia — ^a charge which Spencer covers
up under the respectable name of a av/»axafiaaig {accommodo'

* ** ])eu8 iDteritn, ut superstitioois quovis pacto iretiir obviam, ritus
non pauco9, multorum annorum et gentium usu cobonestatoa, quot
inefnUas noral esse toUrabiles ... in sarroruin suorum numerum adop-
Ufit."

f ^ Nulla ratio occurrit cur deiin tot legibus et ritibua inulilibus
populum Judaicum onerare et cultum nttionalem paene obruere volu-
erit, nisi uc gravi illo jugo, populum impedirot, ne officii sui cancellos
tranailtret, et ad rhua gentilium rueret. Id enim confessum et aper-
tam ear, liujasmodi rttus nullum cum dei natura conaenaum babuiaae,
nee tanto cererooniarum apparatu opus fuiaae ad pietatem colendam.^

434 . Mosaic Origin oftha Pentateuch. [April.

tiony candescentian)^ and even remarks that God by instituting
these rites made sport of his people. See for instance p. 753,
where he says, God commanded the offerings perhaps per
ironiam. — It was shown by the contemporary opponents of
Spencer on what a low idea of God his hypothesis is founded.
See for example Witsius^ in his Aegyyiiacay p. 282. '^^ But
whatever appearance of political wisdom these things may have,
they are destitute of foundation in the Bible, and are figments of
human ingenuity unworthy of the majesty of Deity. But wise
and cunning mortals judge of God by themselves, and ascribe to
heaven political arts and manoeuvres which are scarcely res-
pectable on earth. As if, in organizing and establishing his
people, he needed the low arts of cunning who holds the hearts
of men in his hands and turns them whithersoever be will."*
The view given of God is indeed so low, that one might easily
conjecture that Spencer himself made his hypothesis only per
ironiam^ expecting that the real truth would be plain to those
of his readers who were ripe for it. There are various hints
suggesting this thought. Sd on p. 20 : ^' God appointed many
things in the law covered up with the drapery of types and fig-
ures, perhaps that the Mosaic law might encourage an imitch
tion of the spirit and education of Moses J^-f Certain proof
however is wantmg that Spencer was conscious of the necessa-
ry consequences of his hypothesis-— and this is, for our purpose,
a matter of indifference. It is enough for us that such were the
consequences — ^^that every aspect of this view of the ceremonial
law led to the denial of the genuineness of the Pentateuch.
We give for the sake of example a number of consequences
which necessarily follow from this hypothesis. Is the charac-
ter of the ceremonial law of Moses such as Spencer has descri-

* Verum eni/nvero, quantarncunque haec civilis prudentiae speciem
habeant, praeter dei verbum cuncta dicuntur, et humani commeata
fiunt ingenii, divini numinis baud satis digna. Nimirtim cauti cati-
que in seeulo mortales deum ex sua metiuntur indole ; arcanasque
jmperandi artes et vaframenta Politicoruin,quae vix terra probat,coe-
lo locaot. Quasi vero in populo sibi fortnaDdo firmandoque, iis as-
tutiarum ambagibus indigeat is qui mortaliuin corda in manu habens,
ea quoreum vult flectit." — These words J. D. Michaelis niSgbt well
have taken to heart. (Bee Infra, pp. 8, 9.)

f " Deus multa in lege typorum et figurarum tega mentis in voluta
tradidit, forsan ut lex Mosaica cum ipso Mosia ingenio et educatione
conaenaum eolerat."

1838.] ShaUow and Skeptical bU^Tfretatum. 425

bed it ?r— then it cannot be from God — ^then Moses who ascribes
it to God cannot have been one sent of God — then he cannot
have proved himself such by miracles and prophecies— -then the
Pentateuch >\'hich ascribes so many of these to him cannot have
been written by him. Spencer was besides not satisfied with
robbing the ceremonial law of its'deeper significancy and its di-
vine character — he endeavors also as much as possible to take
away the substance of the moral part of the law. Thus he la-
bors to show, p. 28, that the decalogue is not a general summa-
ry of moral duty, but was only designed to keep down gross
idolatry.

The influence of Spencer's book was very great, as is shown
by the repeated reprints of it, and the editions in Holland and
Germany. Even theologians (as Bossuety Einl. uebers v.
Cramer ^ 227) were imprudent and short-sighted enough to
coincide more or less with him. His opposers, some of them
very learned men, mistook the right mode of assaulting the new
and remarkable position he had taken. Instead of applying all
their strength to a fundamental and sober examination of the
symbolic and typical signification of the Mosaic ritual and thus
showing the miracle of the law itself, they employed themselves
in the fruitless labor of proving that the external forms of the
ritual were not borrowed by the Jews from the heathen, but
exactly the reverse.^ In .the meantime theologians continued
to explain the ritual in the old arbitrary way, thus affi)rding
Spencer some excuse for his hypothesis.

Spencer was followed by CkricuSy^ who adopted the hy-
potheses of his predecessor without any modification or im-
provement. Nothing more is necessary for a perfect charac-
terizing of the man in this respect than his remark on circum-
cision : See his Comm. Gen. 17: 10. ^' It appears to many
incredible that a rite of this kind, inconvenient in itself, and when
performed on older persons scarcely decent, and which besides
can contribute notHing to good morals, was originally instituted

* The view here so unceremoniously rejected by Hengstenberg is
moiniaineil by the greatest names among orthodox divines. See es-
p)ecially Witsius in his Egyptiaca^ and Calebs Court of the Gentiles*
Hengstenberg himself makes a remark (infra, p. 39) which would ap'*
pear to settle the question : ''Such an apeing of what is human by
that wiiich is divine would be the greatest absurdity imaginable.''— -Ta«

t John Le Clerc, Professor at Amsterdam. Ob. 1736.

Vol. XI. No. 30. 54

426 Motaic Origin of the Pentateuch. [April

by the great and good God. They suspect therefore that
Abraham >^ho had seen it practised by the Egyptians, thought
it an excellent custom ; and that God, who accommodates him-
self to our weakness with the greatest condescension, when he
observed this, commanded Abraham to do that himself which
he had approved in others." * The' shallowness of religious
views and principles, which is indeed a peculiarity of the Armin-
ians, appears in him in its highest degree. The ground which
he in reality inwardly takes is entirely a deiatical one. Every-
thing that goes beyond his own abstract idea of God, that refers
to a living God, he calls at once 'Anthropopathy,' * Anthropo-
morphism.' It is to him ^ a shell without a kernel.' Remarks
of this kind occur so frequently as to be tiresome. He never
suspectsf that his own abstract idea may be itself the grossest
anthropomorphism. From his imagined lofty religious height
he looks down with pity upon the sacred characters and the
sacred writers of the Bible. That such kind of views when
they who adopt them have obtained a clear insight into their
real character and bearings— (in our times Gesenius might be
regarded as a Clericus redivivus) — must lead to the denial of
the genuineness of such books as the Pentateuch, scarcely
needs proof. Books which speak so childishly of God, them-
selves refute the supposition of their inspiration. Miracles and
prophecies, which really took place if the Pentateuch is gen-
uine, could have proceeded only from the living God ; and if a
man is anxious lest even the word^ of thQ» sacred book be too
gross for the deity his reason has formed to itself, how must he
feel in regard to those deeds which quite break through the
pretended brazen walls of nature : That the author also really
began to be conscious how little a belief in these last agreed
with his fundamental religious principles, appears from the at-
tempt he has made, in only a few cases however, to explain the
miracles so as to bring them within the bounds of natural opera-
tions. Compare for example his treatise Ue maris Idusnaei
trajedione (on the passage of the Red Sea), attached to his

* " Parum credibile multis videtur rituni ejusmodt iDcommodum,
et quando a grandioribus suscipiebatur, parum honestum, qui denique
neque ad bonos mores quidquam conferre potest, a deo opt. max. pri-
mum institutum. Suspicantur Abraharoum, qui hoc viderat in Aeg.
fieri^in illorum sententiam ivisse ; qu6d cum aoimadverteret deus,
qui summa avynaxiijiacu seae nostrae imbecillitati attemi>erat, idem
Abrabamum juaait facere^ quod jam in aliis probabat.''

1888.] tSudhto and Skeptical Jnterpretaium. 427

Commentary on the Pentateuch.* He wanted indeed an indis-
pensable requisite to faith in miracles, viz. a knowledge of the de-
pendence of the common laws and course of nature upon God ;
the miracles therefore appear in his hands as events taking
place without means and contrary to rule, and assume almost
a grotesque appearance. He has great dread of every thing
like depth of meaning. This can be accounted for only by his
incapability of comprehension ; but often it is plain that there
b at bottom the fear, lest by admitting a deeper sense, he may
forsake the ground of the natural developement of events, and
concede something to the Scriptures which can belong to them
only as sacred writings. Thus he uses every means of ridding
himself of those passages which show that the limited system
of the theocracy was not something opposed to, but a founda-
tion and a preparation for, the universal plan of the Gospel —
that the limited was designed as the means for the unlimited.
The passage Gen. 12: 3, ^< In thee shall all nations of the
earth be blessed," by which at the call of Abraham, the very
beginning of the limited dispensation, this great design of ulti-
mate universality is plainly expressed, is explained by him thus :
"That is, by reference to thy name or example shall benedic-
tions be expressed among many, oriental nations, in these or
similar words : God bless thee as he blessed Abraham."! He
allows himself grossly to violate the laws of the language rather
than adopt a sense which, aside from a divine cooperation in
the case, was so little to be expected, and which would lead
into a field where he did not feel at home. His incapability of
theological interpretation indeed exceeds belief. That exposi-
tion like his then, must have been. a direct preparation for the
mythical understanding, and so for the opinion of the spurious-
ness of the Pentateuch, is shown by a striking example in his
remarks on the Fall. That catastrophe is turned by him into
a low caricature. He remarks on ch. 2: 9, "As the tree of life
may have been a tree whose fruit was medicinal, so the tree of
knowledge may have been a poisonous one, which the wise

* Where Clericus contends that the water of the Red Sea was
driven by a strong north wind into the Oceon, leaving the bottom
where the Israelites passed bare. — Tr.

t " h. e. tuo nomine exemplove probate, benedictionea apud plori-
mofl Orientie populos concipientur, his aut similibaa verbis : benedical
tibi deuB ut benedixit Abrabamo."

4S8 Mosaic Origin of the Pentateuch. [April

would avoid, and by the eating of which the foolish would be-
come more wise. There may hkve been several trees of this
kind, as there are several species of those that are medicinal.
Pliny, 1. XII. c. 6. mentions an India fig which he thus des*
cribes : * There is another, sweeter than an apple, but prejudi-
cial to the stomach.' " He adds : '^ Alexander commanded that
no one of his army should touch this fruit ; — a circumstance
which may illustrate the history before us."* On ch. 3: 7,
" and the eyes of them both were opened" he says, " After
they had eaten the unlawful fruit, they observed what before
they had not attended to, viz. either that they had drawn upon
themselves the divine anger, or, because of the pain in their
intestines that thnt fruit was noxious instead of their deriving
great advantage from it as they had hoped." f On ch. 3: 24,
he says : '^ Grotius thinks this is a Hendiadys, and that ' Cheru-
bim and a flaming sword' is put for ' cherubim, that is, a flaming
sword ;' and he interprets the flaming sword to be burning fires
on the bituminous soil of Babylon, through which alone there
was access to Paradise, which therefore was in this way closed
to Adam. I rather think Moses meant to say that God sent
angels who set on fire the bitumen of the Babylonian or a simi-
lar soil, and used this as a flaming sword for keeping men oS"X

* ^Ut arbor vitae potest esse arbor cujus fructus assent ilt^mi(fio$
8. medicati, ita arbor prudentiae erit arbor venenata, quam vitare pru-
dentium est, et cujus gustato fi'uctu imprudens fit prudeutior. Hujus
generis plures arbores esse potuerunt, quemadmodum plures sunt
tnedicatarum species. Plinius, I. XII. c. 6., meminit cujusdam Indi-
cae ficus, quam ita describit: est et alia, sirnilis huic, dulcior porno,
sed interaneorum valetudini infestn. Subjicit : edixerat Alexander,
nequis agminissui id pomum adiingeret, qua circumstantia haec illus-
trari potest historia.'*

t "Postquam iilicitutn fructum comederunt, animndverterunt,quod
antea in animum non revocaverant ; nempo ant se sibi divinam iram
conciliasse ; aut intestinorum dolore, fructus illius usum esse noxium,
nedum ut ex eo emoiumentum iugens, ut speitiverant, ad se redirct.**

X H. Grotius existitnat hie esse h dta dvoJp, et dici cherub et flam-
man gladii, ay7» jov cherub i. e. flammans gladius; flamroeumque
l^ladiuin interpretatnr ignes ex bituminoso Babylonis agro accensos,
per quos solos dabatur aditus in Paradtsum, qui proinde Adamo eo
pacto clausus erat. Crediderim potius hoc voiuisse Moscn ; deum,
scilicet, angelos misiase, qui Babylooici aut sirnilis agrt bitumen ac-
c«nderent,6oque quasi gladio flammeo ad arcendos homines uterentur."

1838.] ShaUow and Skeptical Interpretation. 429

One might feel tempted to believe that the author meant to
make sport of the Bible, and by showing the absurdities of the
literal historical sense, hint at the necessity of giving it up.
And certainly, if this was not his conscious design, there was
doubtless an ob3cure feeling of the kind at bottom. It is scarce-
ly supposable that the few pretended marks of a later age,
and the supposed historical contradictions, on which (in bis
Sentimens de quelques Theologiem de Hollande sur Phistoire
critique du V, T. p. Richard Simon, Amsterdam, 1685), he
based his attack on the genuineness of the Pentateuch, and the
retraction of w4iich afterwards in his Commentary is not entirely
free from suspicion, should themselves have had the power to
determine him to a decision at that time so important. There
must have been something else which gave importaace to these
grounds — for they alone could have made him but little diffi-
culty. But be that as it may, this is certain, that after time had
brought to light the necessary consequences of this mode of ex-
position, it was absurd to follow that mode and yet maintain the
genuineness of the Pentateuch. The surprise was thei'efore
perfectly reasonable, when RosenmiiJler, who in his mode of
exposition did not stand in the least above Clericus, nay trans-
cribed him almost throughout, appeared all at once as the de-
fender of the genuineness of the Pentateuch. For a fuller
characterizing of our author, whose Commentary has had an
influence equally extende4 and lasting, we will quote a few sen-
tences from his treatise de linffua Hebraica (prefixed to his
Commentary on Genesis). These show that standing on
classic heathen ground, he looked far down upon the sacred
writers ; that these, whose glory is internal, had for him no
form nor comeliness ; that he was destitute even of Herder's
tenderness of fancy which found means to reserve for the sa-
cred writers at least a modest little place by the side of profane
literature ; that he had no conception of a peculiar standard by
which the sacred writings should be judged, different even from
that of oriental literature. P. VII : '^ In accordance with the
genius of their language, they cultivated poetry somewhat more^
and there are many things in their poetic compositions strongly ^
and elegantly expressed ; but from these you will see rather
what they might have done if they had applied the study which
other nations have devoted to this object, than that they actu-
ally attained to the praise of eloquence."* P. VIII : " They

■ ■■ ■ ■ ' ' I' ' ' ' »

* ** Poeticen, pro linguae suae iDgenio, paulp magia coloerunt, et

430 Mosaic Origin of the Pentatetich. [Apkil

despise all rhetorical rules even such as do not depend on the
varying tastes of men, but on fixed and universal principles.
They want necessaries, they abound in superfluities.'** P. IX :
" Great regard to the order of time and events is not to be found
among the Hebrews. Thus wiiat is' said of the division of the
nations, Gen. x. ought to have been put after ch. 11: 9. In
ch. II: 3, 4, 8 there are transpositions in the narrative, as also
in ch. 24: 23, etc. ... A degrading of an object by a low figure
ought to be avoided. Hence it is not proper to say, ' The Lord
is a man of war,' ' God has aroused like one sleeping, etc' "f
These censures do not, as Clericus pretends, apply only to the
accidental form of the biblical phraseology, but to the form in its
connection with the sense, and they show how unacquainted he
was with this last, and how cold it left him.

After Clericus came J. D. MickadisX whose Commentaries
on the Laws of Moses are here especially to be considered,
although his * Anmerkungen fir Ungelehrte^ (Annotations for
the Unlearned) must also be noticed. His influence was even
greater than that of his predecessor. The commentation of the
latter was pretty generally regarded as that of a mere philolo-
gian, who was admitted as authority only in matters of his own
department. Theological commentation looked down upon
him, and continued its own way undisturbed ; although it was
incapable of bringing forth any thing important, and was thus
unable to neutralize the influence of what was theological in
Clericus's expositions. The commentation of J. D. Michaelis
on the contrary succeeded in obtaining almost universal author-

plurima in canticis eorum legantur graviter et ornate dicta ; sed unde
magis videas, quid facere potuissent, ei studium quantuin apud alias
gentes adlacum est, adhibuiasent, quam ad eloqoeatiae laudem perve-
nisseiDtelligas.*'

* ^Oinnes Rhetorura canones, etiam eofi, qui non ex variante homi-
num arbitrio pendent, sed certa et omnibus gentibus communi ratione
nituntur, spemunt. . . . Neceasariis carent et superfluis abundant."

t " Ordinis temporia et rerum magna ratio ab Hebraeis non habe-
tur. Sic, quae de divisione gentium babentur. Gen. c. 10, debent v.
9. c. 11. postponi. Cap. 11: 3,4, 8 aunt quoque narrationis inverstones,
ut et c. 24: 23, etc. . . . Fugienda est omnis turpitude earum rerum,
ad quas eonim animoa, qui audiunt trahet atniilitudo. Per banc ca-
nonem, dicere non licuiaaet, deum esse virura bellioosum, deum excl-
tari quasi dormientcm, etc."

t Profeaaor at Halle and Gottingen. Died 1791.

1838.] Shallow and Skeptical Interpretation. 431

ity — so that his exegetical results may be considered as univer-
sally adopted at the time when the crisis came. Whatever
raised itself against it was only laughed at, and that in part just-
ly, as it showed all the weakness and helplessness of old age.
It may be safely asserted that Michaelis, by removing the foun-
dations on which the genuineness of the sacred books rest, did
it more injury than those who afterward directly attacked it.
He overthrew the substance, and then contended in vain against
those who tried their strength upon the empty shell. His scope
in the exposition of the Pentateuch is throughout an apologetic
one. He aims, in opposition to the attacks of the English de-
ists and of the French atheists, to show the excellence of the
Mosaic law. But as he had no eye for its true excellence, he
strips Moses of the praise which really belongs to him, and
gives him another which he never sought, and which rather
makes suspicious than establishes his character as an inspired
lawgiver. ^^ I will make bold to say," says he in the beginning
of his Commentaries, Part I. ^ 1, ^^ that in the books of Moses
are to be found some entirely unexpected and splendid instances
of legislative wisdom." To point out these instances is the
great object of his work. Moses appears, if the results of this
work are considered established, a roan much like the Sir Knight
Michaelis. That such a man should have had the aid of mira-
cles and prophecies, is very improbable. Others who, though
Moses be granted all the merit which Michaelis allows him,
stood much higher as lawgivers than he, had no such aid. But
since Michaelis's time, there has been as much zeal to strip him
of the imaginary merit of political cunning, as to refuse to re-
store that which really belongs to him. Remarkable in this re-
spect is EichfiomU critique upon Michaelis, in the BibliotheJc
jur hibJische Literature Th. 3. S. 847 : " In the industrious
search after political plans and schemes, secret designs and pro-
jeclts are too unceremoniously ascribed to the lawgiver which he
never thought of, or subtle political principles' are made to con-
nect laws which have a much looser connection. It is well
that even Michaelis has perhaps with too full a hand, given too
much : — we can now take away the easier. The poor tent of
Moses with its furniture is now before us; if any ofthisfur^
niture is still too splendid^ it can easily be exchanged for some--
thing of inferior, quality, ^^ Michaelis's political principles had
not grown on christian soil : he had borrowed them from the
ungodly politics of the age. French writers had been his

433 Mosaic Origin of the Pentateuctu [ Apbil

teachers. By ascribing now these principles without shame or
reserve to Moses, he drew him down into a society where one
would expect to find any body else sooner than a man of God.
The assurance with which he does this, thinking that he is
thereby doing a service to religion, must often excite a smile.
The grossest thing of this kind is the assertion that Moses cher-
ished the maxim', that the end sanctifies the means, and that so
far, as sometimes to have used religion itself as a means to ac-
complish his purpose. He speaks on this point without the
least reserve, in Part I. ^ 13 : " In the legislative wisdoni of
Moses, I observe in general one stroke of policy, which is not
commonly used in our days, and which perhaps is really no
more capable of use. Many laws are made sacred by being
placed in connection with virtue and religion, and having a re-
ligious signification or direction given to them, while their real
causes and reasons are concealed* Such laws obtain thereby a
degree of reverence, as the violation of them is regarded as a
sin against virtue itself. . . . The few remains of the political
wisdom of the Egyptians with which we are acquainted, show
that they also often made use of this means. . . . \Vhen it could
be done without deceit (!) Moses makes use of a similar policy."
In the course of the work a great number of cases are brought
forward, in which Moses is made to act upon this principle.
So, e. g. Part 3. ^ 145: " When the observance of a certain
law was very important, aid was sought from vows and religion.
Thus did Moses against idolatry, the prohibition of which was
one of the fundamental maxims of his government ; and the
Roman people did the same for the safety of their tribunes. It
is manifest at once that this piece of political wisdom must not
be used too freely, etc." He makes religion to be used as a
hieans even for the lowest and most trivial objects. In the re-
ligious import given to the prescribed cleanliness of the camp
(Num. 5: 1-^, etc.) Moses was, according to Michaelis, " not
in earnest — his real object, which if it had been openly express-
ed, would not have been enough regarded, was, the prevention
of foul smells. — Moses speaks as if he who seethed a kid in its
mother's milk committed a sin against religion — ^the sagacious
man designs nothing more by this than to induce the people to
cook kids in olive^il instead of butter, because they would taste
better. — Among the ostensible reasons for forbidding the eaUng
of fat and blood was this, that they belonged to the altar, and
were too holy to be eaten — ^the real, concealed reason was, that

1838.] <S%afibtif and Skt^tical LUerpreiaUan. 433

«
the eating of the fat parts and the use of fat in boiling, baking,
and stewing, is injurious to a people subject to diseases of the
skin, etc." See Part 4. ^ 171, 205, 206. This example of
bad political maxims ascribed to Moses is indeed the grossest
and most strikbg, but by no means the only one. There is
another, running through the whole book, which is indeed more
refined, but still, if established, calculated of itself to overthrow
the belief of the divine mission of Moses, and thus that of the
genuineness of the Pentateuch. Michaelis is at once an oppo-
ser of the divine right, and a defender of the unlimited power of
government. Government is, according to him, a creature of
the people-— but then, as representative of the popular will, it
is to have universal sway ; while every divine rignt is limited
by him and confined to a certain sphere. This doctrine, origi-
nating in modem ungodliness, he also ascribes to Moses, and
that to such an extent that the principle is made absurd and ri-
diculous. The lawgiver inspects the chambers and the pots.
He takes such tender care of nis subjects that he orders them to
cook, not with butter but with oil, because it will taste better.
" This," remarks Michaelis, Part 4. ^ 205, " will be called by
many a German reader, delicatessen over-done, delicaiesse — ^but
it might be of use to a people going to Palestine." Health is
urged by the lawgiver upon his suUects by means truly heroic.
Houses for example which are infected with leprosy, he com-
mands, through concern for the health of the inhabitant, to be
pulled down. For delicate nerves he shows the most tender
care :— the leprous person must not dwell in the camp, must
cover his face, etc., lest he should excite one's disgust by his
really hateful appearance, or, frighten him by an unexpected
touch. Such tenderness of police would be cruelty even to
those for whose sake at the expense of others it was enforced.
Who would not have his disgust excited or suffer a little fright
for once, rather than feel the hand of the police always on his
neck?

Michaelis shows every where the most anxious dread of for-
saking the ground which he holds in common with his oppo-
nents— ^not because he fears they would not follow him to
another, but because — and this is his strongest reason — ^he him-
self feels nowhere else at home. Hence, in regard to every thing
in the law which can be defended only by reasons felt by one of
deep religious feeling, he prepared the way for an easy triumph
to his opposers. For all the acuteness which he manifeAied
Vol. XL No. 30. 55

434 Mosaic Origin oftht Pentateuch. [Apbii»

could not long conceal the weakness of the defence which he
had made upon the ground of mere natural causes^ and that the
supernatural ground was not defensible, was now, after this con-
cession of the very leader of supematuralism, considered as
established. Thus in part L ^ 65, the sentiment that when
God says, Ex. 34: 24, that during the absence of the Hebrews
at their yearly feasts at Jerusalem, no one should desire their
land, he pledges himself to reward fidelity oja their part with
fidelity on his, Michaelis sets aside by a remark too gross even
for those who believe in a Providence as little as the Deists do.
" Will we dare," says he, " to explain the words of Moses so
as to make him promise a periodical miracle on the part of God,
viz. that for three weeks in every year, all the enemies of the
Israelites should be turned into blocks ?'' One might here al-
most conceive himself listening to the knight (lord) in 2 Kings
vii** Moses, in this passage, according to Michaelis, enjoins
upon the people to trust in a principle of international law
which he pretends was observeci at that time, by which one
nation respected the religious rites of the other, and suspended
hostilities while a feast was celebrating. Thus he remarks in
reference to the Sabbatical year, which, notwithstanding its re-
ligious exterior, had no other object according to him than to
lead the people always to keep a provision of grain, " Can (jod
have pledged himself to work such a periodical miracle (the
double crop in the sixth year) which would have been, besides,
entirely unnecessary if Moses had not made such a ruinous
law ?" What crude views of the common course of nature lie
at the bottom of such remarks ! How inconsistent, that he who
is so impotent to see the hand of God in nature ^ will yet in part
maintain its agency in history ! Thus he denies the divine
right of the Israelites to Palestine, and labors in vain, with all
the art of a special pleader, to prove their human right to it. Of
the essence of the theocracy he has no conception. That in
which alone he finds it, viz. the decision by Urim and Thum-
mim, the presence of the cloud, etc., belonged for the most part
only to the Mosaic times, and appears, in its isolation, so singu-
lar, so ex abruptOf that it was immediately lost as soon as the
mythical interpretation laid its hand upon it. The theocracy
was ^* quoted in its main design only a name, a designation.

* " Behold, if the Lord would make windows in heaven, might this
thing be ?^

1838.] Historical Sk^ticim. 435

which might the easier keep out idolatry." Part I. ^ 85. On
Ex. 19: 6, where the Israelites are called a kingdom of priests^
he remarks, ^^ This mode of speaking appears to have come
from Egypt, where the priests had great privileges, owned their
own lands tax-free, and were besides supported by the king."
How can he who has so little conception of the Israelites as
God's people, have anyjust conception of the God who really
dwelt among them. The difference between the Old Testa-
ment religion and heathenism, is, as he understands it, the most
superficial possible — ^that of Monotheism and Polytheism. The
grand object of the law is according to him the negative one, the
prevention of idolatry : — the positive design, that of producing
a living practical religious feeling, he entirely loses sight of.
With such a low view of religion, it is therefore very natural
that he should feel dislike when it advances any claims. Thus,
in his additions to his Commentaries, in Ammon und Ber-
tholdfs Journal, Th. 4. S. 356, he shows that some of Abra-
ham's servants must have been circumcised before, because
otherwise (at the first circumcision) all work must have been
suspended for eight days, and the cattle could not have been fed.
He thus zealously labors to find out for all severe and burden-
some ceremonies, dietetical, medicinal, municipal and other ol>-
jects, in order to show that while the Levites did not as ser-
vants of religion earn the revenue they enjoyed, yet that as
physicians, surveyors, and learned men they well deserved it.

It is remarkable that Michaelis, thus standing as he did on
the ground of mere natural causes in explaining the biblical his-
tory, yet left the miracles of the Pentateuch generally untouch-
ed, and sought an explanation from natural causes only where
Clericus had done so before him. See especially Ex. xiv.
This however is easily accounted for from the fact that in this
respect he departed less from the older views than in most others.
Had he departed here also, he must have denied the miracles
and the genuineness of the Pentateuch altogether ; and this, on
account of education, and perhaps a remnant of early pious feel-
ing, he could not do. Also the spirit of the age, at the time
that he was b the vigor of his faculties, had still its influence
over him.

Historical Skepticism,

But however close may have been the connection between
the degenerate exegesis we have just described, and the denial of

436 Mosaic Origin of the PetUaieuch. [April

the genuioeness of the Pentateuch, yet there must have been
some powerful causes in the last quarter of the last century, to
have produced the transition from the former to the latter just
at that time — a transition which from that time became more
and more predominant. Without some such causes, either thb
dangerous but natural step would have been prevented by the
mere power of orthodox habit, or a reaction would have taken
place in exegesis itself. The very degeneration of exegesis
shows the existence of such causes — causes which had been
long silently preparing. For if that degeneration was not mere-
ly accidental — ^if it had its origin in the continually extending
spirit of the times-^-« spirit which formed itself more and more
into a conscious hostility to what was old, then the denial of the
genuineness must not be regarded simply as a consequence of the
perversion of exegesis, but is to be derived immediately from
the spirit of the age itself.

The preceding ages had had a great reverence for the past,
and so, for all historical accounts. This reverence was for the
most part, the result of humility. To be hostile to the past,
was, they believed, to be enemies to themselves. They did
not wish to be cast entirely upon themselves. But here also,
as always, that which was in principle good, was abused and
carried to extremes. Although individuals were by no means
wanting who practised historical criticism with unprejudiced
minds, yet there was in general a too extravagant respect for
every thing that gave itself out for history.' There was a dread
of beginning the work of historical criticism through a secret
fear of the end to which it might lead.

In the latter part of the seventeenth century this reverence
for history began gradually to disappear ; at first in England,
Holland and France (it is sufficient to mention the names of
Bayle and Harduin), and then, after the accession of Frederick
II. to the throne, also in Germany, where the love of contra-
diction, once worked up by that spirit of investigation which is
peculiar to the nation, put on a very dangerous shape. The
higher the age, in proud self-importance, regarded itself as stand-
ing above those that were past, so much the more did it feel
itself allowed to do as it pleased with their monuments* It
thought that at any rate there was little to lose by doing so. Its
opinion of its own strength rose higher when it had succeeded
m overthrowing that on which the blinded past had rested. A
cry of triumph was raised, whenever an old structure fell to the

1838.] Bkiorical Skeptidm. 437

ground. In addition to this, the proud temper of the age lost
more and more the spirit of Jove, which enables one to open
himself to what b good in others, and thus improves the power
of the understanding. What was not understood it was con-
sidered perfectly right to reject.

This universal change in the position of the times in regard
to history must not be passed over when we are investigating
the causes of the change in their position in regard to the sacred
books and especially the Pentateuch. How every thbg of a
special character rests here upon something general, how the
attacks on Homer for instance had in one point of view the
same origin as those against the biblical books, has been already
shown by others. Thus Schubarth remarks {Ideen ueber Ho*
mer und sein Zeitalter, S. 236) : ^' Since the middle of the
last century there has prevailed a young and vigorous spirit,
which has led men to believe that the human mind is able to
draw all its nutriment and sustenance from itself. Of course
the productions of past ages, which had till now been the only
resort for counsel, light, culture and edification, lost at once
much of their former estimation and importance. There ap-
peared more and more an active, bold, rash, nay insolent spirit
of contradiction against the past. And accordingly we see that
after men had endeavored to rid themselves of a burdensome
restraint in regard to the Bible, the same spirit of disruption
spread itself upon every thing received from former ages, with
the effort rather to throw it off altogether, than to ascertain and
defend its true worth and importance.

Still the general explanation b altogether bsufficient to ac-
count for the course of opinions in regard to the Pentateuch.
It can, considering the strong proofs of genuineness, account at
most only for the denial of that genuineness by individuals, and
as a temporary thmg — ^not for the obstinacy with which this de-
nial has been maintained, and the wide prevalence it has found.
In profane literature, the periodof this levity of skepticism came,
soon to an end ; and if single cases of it now still appear, and
show that this perverse spirit has not yet wholly died out, yet
it exists only in individuals, and can never again become general.
External proofs are granted more of theirjust weight, and there
is less levity in handling the internal. There is some efibrt to
understand before condemning. Where there b no stronger
motive, there pride at least urges, by way of change, to build up
again that which pride had pidled down. Every (ancient) wn-

488 Mosaic Origin of the Pentateuch, [Apbil

ter who had unjustly lost what belonged to him is in process of
being restored b due time in integrum. The turn which the in-
vestigations on Homer have of late taken, is known. Even
those who still continue to doubt differ materially from their
predecessors. Where these saw nothing but confusion and
chance, there their followers discover profound unity and organic
connection-^very different from what is the case in regard to
the Pentateuch, where the absurd assertion of a fragmentary
compilation is continually repeated. The orations of Cicero
which were rejected by Wolf are again acknowledged to be
genuine. Socher's rash judgment on some dialogues of Plato
was received with dissatisfaction, and even the rejection of some
smaller and less important ones by Ast, is now admitted to have
been too strong. Instead of rejecting them at once and entire-
ly upon the assertion of their external spuriousness, men are
satisfied that they are immature products of the Platonic spirit.
See Richier, Oeschichie d. Philosophies Th. 2. S. 170 ff. and
Ackermann, Das Christliche im Plato, S. 21. The eighth
book of Thucydides was denied to be his, on account of its dif-
fering from the rest in mode of representation. Ntebuhr re-
gards this inference as a cutting of the knot, as stupid capricious-
ness. ^^ I think I see," says he, in his Mein Schriften^ Th. I.
S. 400, '' in this very difference, this great master's just sense
of propriety : — ^that as the solemnity and dignity of the style
rise higher and higher until the catastrophe in Sicily, so after
the importance of the events ceases, the narration itself assumes
another tone. An inferior writer would have thought it neces-
sary to maintain the same pathos to the end. For the history
of events toward the end of the war, Thucydides would have
returned to his loftiness of style. But the period of long dis-
tress and torture during the undecided contest required a sim-
pler narrative." How much more obvious than this is the rea-
son of the difference of manner between Deuteronomy and the
other books of the Pentateuch — how much less tact of observa-
tion is necessary in order to discover it than Niebubr here shows.
It occurs of itself to every unprejudiced mind ; and that it is
nevertheless so disdainfully rejected, that we constantly hear the
assertion, the difference of style proves unanswerably a different
author, shows very manifestly that here interests come into play
from the influence of which profane literature is free. When
we consider the universal disapprobation with which even a
moderate tendency to historical skepticism was regarded even in

1688.] lEitarical Skepticism. , 4S9

men of such standing as O. Miiller, we think we may confident-
ly assert that if such ridiculously arbitrary criticism as that of
De Wette had been directed to disprove the genuineness of a
profiine writer or against any part of profane history, it would
he already forgotten, and would have only served to obtain for
its author the sorry celebrity of a Harduin. But even if De
Wette excited some attention at first, a book like that of Vaikt^
would, if he had chosen to employ his acuteness on Herodotus
for instance, instead of the Pentateuch, have been carried im-
mediately from the womb to the grave. It would. have been
looked upon as lying beyond the limits of the field of science.

How little the universal tendency of the age to historical
skepticism can satisfactorily explain our problem, is seen from
the fact, thai many who decidedly deny the genidneness of the
Pentateuch, and the credibility of what it contains j show in
other cases an utter want of historical criticism, and are more
ready to admit the genuineness and credibility of ancient wri'
tings than any inquirer of note in earlier ttmes. The same
Volney for example who with true Voltaire-audacity, denies all
historic foundation for the Pentateuch, who heads the fourteenth
chapter of his ' Recherches sur Phistoire ancienne,' with ^ du
personage appelle Abraham' (concerning the personage called
Abraham,) appeals as to an unexceptionable witness to Sanch-
oniathon, whose false pretensions to antiquity even the criticism
of the unenlightened times had long before exposed, and uses him
as a lapis Cydius by which to try the pretensions of others.
'^ Let us hear (says be, 1. 1. p. 166, Brussels,) Sanchoniathon,
who wrote about 1300 years before the Christian era.'' Late
writers such as NicoL Damascenus, Alex, Polyhisior, and
Artapanits, whose accounts on these matters are evidendy only
the echo of Jewish tradition, and who have therefore no inde-
pendent weight as historians, are according to him important
m the highest degree, and capable of afiTording weapons against
the truth of the sacred history. And it is not a mere accident,
that that very German critic who has succeeded best in conceal-
ing the theological bias which influences him, and who could
therefore venture with a good hope of producing efifect, to de-
signate as naif the charge of doctrinal predilections — ^tbat &e-

* Yatke is firofessor at Beriin — a colleague of Uengstenberg nod
profeaaea to Ke a follower of Schleiermacher. See an extended crit-
ique on bis * Biblisehe Tktdagit^ infra, p. 24 aeq. — ^Tr.

440 Mogaic Origin of the Peniaieuch. [Apbil

ieniut has bad to show before the eyes of all Europe bow easy
it would be for him to acknowledge the genuineness of the
Pentateuch, if the matter were to be decided simply in the fo-
rum of historical conscience. He first ran into the trap of a
French marquis, who for the sake of sport gave out an inscrip-
tion fabricated by himself as a relique of great antiquity.
Gesenius acknowledged it as an important monument for the
history of Gnosticism, and commented on it in his essay ^ de
inscripiione nuper in Cyrenaica reperta, (on the inscription
lately found in Gyrene.) Scarcely had he got over the smart
which the confession of his error, now no longer to be deferred
after the exposure of the fraud by Bockh, Kopp and others^
must have caused him — scarcely prepared himself to cover this
error in oblivion by important publications on paleography, than
be fell into a far worse difficulty. What had happened to him
before in regard to a few lines, occurred again with a whole
book. What a wide distance between the youthful Dr. of
medicine Wagenfeld, and the ancient Sanchoniathon ! If it was
a scdto mortah from Wagenfeld to Philo, how much more fi;txn
Wagenfeld to Sanchoniathon !*

Judgment of late Historicms,

Another important proof that the solution of the problem
(why the genumeness of the Pentateuch has been so universal-
ly denied^ must be sought elsewhere than on ground common to
all branches of literature is the fact, that the judgment of late
historians and of other learned men not theologians in regard
to the Pentateuch differs so essentially from that of theolo-
gians ; a phenomenon which can be explained only in this way,
that the theologian shuts his eyes to every thing until be finds
bow it stands in relation to his preconceived opinions, and in
accordance with the result he obtains here, decides upon the
former question ; while the historian, although he may share
the same opinions, is yet not so much influenced by them as to
be induced to violate bis historical conscience and turn traitor to
history. This matter is so important that we shall be justified
in taking time to illustrate it by a few examples. That the
Pentateuch would even now regain universal acknowledgement

* Dr. Wagenfeld of Bremen pretended to have discovered a Greek
Manuscript of the work of Philo Byblius the pretended translator of
Banchooiatbon. See iofrai p. 34, note 1.— Tr.

1888] Judgment of the ESitariam. 441

as the work of Moses if it had to do only with historical criti-
cism, and had only to pass through the ordeal of the universal
tendency to historical skepticism, is made the plainer by the
facts about to be quoted, when we remember that this is one of
the subjects on which the historians are roost dependent upon
the theologians, on account of their want of the knowledge of
the necessary languages, and the vast extent of the field which
they have to occupy ; and which therefore the theologians have
tried every way to confuse and darken lor them, [t must be
remembered too, that the historians are also, as we shall here*
after show, always under a certain influence of the theological
principles of the times. If then, under such disadvantages,
historians still regard the Pentateuch as authentic history, the
fact is so much the more important.

Heeren^s position in regard to the Pentateuch deserves first
to be attended to. He has, it is manifest, designedly avoided
expressing himself decisively and fully on this subject. But
this very avoiding of the subject is a plain proof of his want of
confidence in the investigations of the theologians. Without
permitting himself to be deceived with their confident air, he
will first see what issue the matter comes to. « So far as the
cause of the accused comes under his cognition he finds no fault
in him. The loud ' crucify/ of theologians does not deceive
him. Also, there is not in all his works, one doubt expressed
in regard to any historical statement of the Pentateuch. When
he quotes it, especially in that volume of his Ideen which treats
of Egypt, he uses it without qualification as a source worthy of
confidence. The principal facts of the Pentateuch are acknowl-
edged by him to be historically establbhed in his Geschichte
des AUerthumSy 4te Aufl. S. 40. In the same book S. 58
(p. 51 of the English translation) he remarks that the accounts of
Moses, although they give no continuous history, yet give a
true picture of Egypt in bis time. He mentions as a subject
for further oral explanation (to his classes) ' importance and ex-
cellencies of the Jewish accounts so far as they are purely his-
torical.' Particularly important however is a remark of Heeren
made vety lately in a notice of a new volume of Rosselini's
woric on Egypt, in the Gott. gel Anz. 1835, S. 1328. " We
cannot close this notice without expressing the wish that some
learned orientalist would subject to a critical and impartial ex-
amination the chapter contained in pp. 254 — ^270 of this work,
and the drawing in the Atlas belonging thereto, mafiMiiefiri

Vol. XI. No. 30. 56

449 Moicde Origin of the PentateueL [ Ar ul

^niliy No. 49, representing the making of bricks, ijr this mof^
umental detice is a representation of the enslaved children of
hrael at their labors^ it is a reliqxie equally important for exe-
gesis and for chronology. For exegesis, because ic would be
a striking proof of the high antiquity of the Mosaic writings and
especially for the book of Exodus, the description in which,
ehs. 1, and 5, this monument most faithfully exhibits and illus-
trates, even down to subordinate matters. For chronology,
because it belongs to the time of the eighteenth dynasty, and
the reign of Thutmes-Moeris, about 1740 years before Christ,
and would give fixed points and landmarks both for sacred and
profane history. According to the inscriptions which stand as
usual above the figures, it is the monument of an inspector of
the royal edifices, of the name of Roscere." How manifold
must the proof of the genuineness of the Pentateuch have be-
fore been to one who gives a hearing to this new witness but
just out of I)is grave — a witness whom the theologian would at
once have given a rap on the mouth — like the negro, who,
when one supposed to be dead raised himself up in his coffin,
immediately pushed him back again, exclaiming, ' I have it in
black and white that you are dead.'

After Heeren let us hear Johannes V, Multer. He has al-
ways been consistent with himself in admitting the genuineness
of the Pentateuch. He maintained it even before his religious
principles had become fixed. 'The historian had preceded the
Christian in this conviction. He is open to internal proofs of
genuineness, and if such exist, he knows how to set aside what-
ever else may appear to contradict them. Thus in his AUg,
Oeschichtey 3te Aufl. Th. I. S. 444, he says, " Every trait of
the first book (Genesis) has relation to a state of thmgs and to
objects whicli accord only with Moses. When he makes men-
tion of the head of his own race he shows the boldness of truth.
The whole air and manner is peculiar to him. Even trivialities
prove the genuineness. But it was the custom in the most an-
cient times, passing over defails, to represent the more impor-
tant occurrences in lofty terms as the will and work of the great
first cause ; because the practical spirit and object of the narra-
tors, filling their souls with an earnest solemnity, led them, un-
incumbered with theoretic technicalities, to urge upon their fel-
low-men dependence upon their Sovereign-Ruler and obedience
to his ordinances as expressed to us in nature." Theologians
aee in tbe ceremonial law ti monument of refined priestcraft, a

1838.] Judgment of the Hhtorians. 448

system of external religious rules, which originated in an age
when the spirit of religion was unknown. See for example
Ve Wette, Krit. S. 270 ff. To M'liller it appears as entirely
worthy of one sent of God, as perfectly according with the
spirit of Moses, and with the character of his age. " He con-
secrated," says he, S. 441, " a great symbol, consisting entirely
of ceremonies ; so that while the simple fundamental law con-
tained nothing but what their fathers had believed, with the ad-
cfition of a few admonitions, the ritual law gave the people con-
tinual employment in rites which engaged the senses. There
is a tradition the truth of which is made probable by some re-
maining vestiges, that Moses explained the meaning of these
usages, and that these explanations were preserved among the
elders : yet he might foresei^ that their substantial meaning would
not, even without such explanation, escape men of understand-
ing. In other places also he puts aside with little pains rocks
of offence which theologians had cast in the way. "The re-
petitions," says he in his AnmerJcungen zu den Buchem Mosis
(Remarks on the books of Moses) in the Appendix to the
nlicken in die Bihel by his brother J. G. Miiller 2ter Band,
Winterth. 1830, S. 476, "the repetitions are in the spirit of
those ancient times." Also, (ibid. S. 476,) "As soon as we
think of the greatness of the object, no repetition is tedious—
every thing shows what it is for." On the genealogies and list
of nations in Gen. 10, to maintmn still the historical character
of which, is held by theologians, to be a ridiculous anachronism,
he, the historian, who is not, like them, so credulous as to re-
ceive at once every new discovery as true, nor like them so un-
scientific as to regard facile etymologies as sufficient data for
constructing histories and for overthrowing them, he says (ibid.
S. 458), " The data are geographically entirely true. From
this chapter universal history ought to begin." These Remarks
show also that his opinion as to the genuineness of the Penta-
teuch, cannot be explained as a prejudice originating in accident
and maintained by ignorance, but that it is the result of funda-
mental and persevering study. If the Pentateuch has in fact
such pitiful historical pretensions as theologians assert, then
Johannes Von Miiller must be struck out of the list of our great
historians.

Neither does Luden show any great desire to accept of these
'Grecian presents' without examination. .He shows without
disguise that the Pentateuch makes upon him a very different

444 HHoioic Origin of the Pentateuch. [Apbil

impression from what it does upon the theologians. And
though he does not venture to take ground in decided and en-
tire opposition to them, yet be very carefully avoids making any
decided concessions ; thinkbg that the matter may easily take
another turn, and then his admissions would only cause him re-
gret. In his Oeschichte des AUerthuma, 2te Aufl. Jena, 1819,
S. 60) he remarks, ^' If it is considered how and when those
writings probably originated, and if the relation is never forgot-
ten in which the Israelites supposed themselves to stand towards
Jehovah, and that they relate their fortunes always in accor-
dance with that relation, then to be sure some of the details may
be matter of doubt, but on the whole the course of events is
truly given us." Id. S. 61 : " Their great increase in Egypt
in the course of more than four hundred years is in accordance
with nature ; the severe oppression which they were finally
called to suffer is very conceivable ; and still more conceivable
their longing after the never forgotten native land." Id. S. 62 :
" The forty years residence in the wilderness was a wise mea-
sure ; and exhibits Moses- in all his greatness." Id. S. 63 :
'* The law which God gave to Israel through Moses from time
to time, under awful and terrible circumstances, is remarkable
in the highest degree, and deserves profound investigation, not
only became it is the oldest^ or because it is distinguished by
its great general principles, but also, and especially, because in
it foreign (Egyptian) regulations are adapted with such wisdom
to the manners and national character of the Israelites." Id«
S.64 : " But forty years in the wilderness with signs and won-
ders had not succeeded in training up and making holy to the
Lord that degraded and stiff-necked people. The sublime
songs of Moses did not secure devotion to Jehovah. The re-
cord of his miraculous providence in regard to them — the oldest
manvment of written history — held not the people in fidelity
toward God."

Wachler in his Handbuch der Oeschichte der Literatur
(Manual of History of Literature), 2te Ausgabe, Th. I. S. 78,
thus speaks : " Moses the author of the Hebrew constitution,
was, as lawgiver, poet and historian, a model for after genera-
tions. The five books which bear his name are, with the ex-
ception of some small additions, of the greatest antiquity, and
belong to the times of his glorious administration. They con-
tain views on divine and human things — political reflections —
dear views into futurity — and the gushings forth of deep feel-

1838.] Judgmmt of the Hiitoriam. 445

ing." Id* S« 79 : ^^ The oldest poetry of the Hebrews was
epic, and celebrated the creation of the world and the first his-
tory of the human race with immediate reference to their na*
tional history. It received its form from Moses, who also gave
the first model for lyric poetry.

Schlosserm his translation of the Universal History, 1. 1. S.
237, expresses himself as follows : '^ This (the composition of
the greatest part of the Pentateuch by Moses^ was so much the
more probable and natural, as Moses had oeen educated in
Egypt, where-all transactions, even civil processes, were in wri-
ting, as he found characters for the sounds of his own language
already among the Phenicians, and he himself instituted a nu-
merous class of writers in the country, who were partly employ-
ed in the police, and partly in order to prevent controversies
about the boundaries of lands, had to keep the genealogies, and
record important changes."

Leo bad formerly, in his Vorlesungen uber Judische Oe-
schichte (Lectures on Jewish History) submitted himself fully
to the authority of the theologians, and was quoted by them
with great triumph as one of their party. They bad, indeed,
reason to triumph, as be was in fact the first historian of any
importance whom they had been able to allure into their snare.
But Leo began afterwards to see more and more with his own
eyes, and found that while he had been zealously searching out
the traces of a pretended great priest-cabal in Israel, he had
himself been taken in the net of a real priest-cabal in Germany,
and at last openly renounced his obedience, and returned back
to the sphere of history. In his Lehrbuch d. Universal ge*
schichte (Text-book of Universal History), Bd. L Halle, 1836,
S. 570, he thus speaks of the Pentateuch : '^ We have then,
after examining what has recently been written on this subject,
come to the decided conviction, that the essential parts of the
law, as well as a great portion of the historical accounts, which
form the groundwork of the Pentateuch, and cannot be entirely
sepaited from the laws, as they show their import and design,
were tmiiten by Moses himself; and that the gathering of the
whole into one corpus, if not done by Moses himself, certainly
took place soon after his time, perhaps during his life, and under
his own eye : — and that the obtaining of a different result from
the critical investigations made on this subject, and which cer-
tainly in point of learning are very valuable, has its cause
simply in the fact that men have not sufficiently disungubhed

446 JUbsaie Origin of the PentateUiCh, [Aprii.

between the Ikist and the West, and between the infantile
character of that ancient age with its phenomena and circum-
stances, and these modern times which by refined reflection and
byper*wisdom have got beyond all the natural modes of judging
and acting."

Von Roiieck has surrendered himself so entirely to the spirit
of the times from which the theologians have received their pre-
judices against the Pentateuch, that we could not wonder if we
saw these prejudices in him in their greatest extent. And still
this is not the case. Between him and De fVette for example,
there still remains a great difference. In his review of the
sources of history for the first period, Allgem, Oeschichte (Uni-
versal History), Th. I. lite Aufl. Freib. 1835, S. 57, he re-
marks : ^' It cannot be denied that the narratives contained in
the first book of Moses are distinguished above all these worth-
less accounts (on the origin of the earth and of man — by San-
choniathon, Zoroaster, and in general all Oriental, Chinese,
Thibetan, aud Indian accounts and also those of Grecian histo-
rians and philosophers) as well by a mode of statement more
agreeable to reason and the eternal laws of nature, as by their
having come down to us uncorrupted ; and therefore these Mo-
saic documents, which there is besides good ground for regard-
ing as the oldest in the world, will always obtain approbation
and respect even before the bar of a criticism purely scientific
and having no reference to religious views. . . . The same judg-
ment is to be pronounced in regard to the original history of
man. Here also the Mosaic accounts have such a manifest su-
periority over those of all the so-called profane writers, that we
cannot deny them, at least comparatively, a high degree of pro-
bability." In his review of sources for the history of the Hebrews,
S. 73, he says: "For the history of no other people of this
period do we possess so ancient, so circumstantial and such
credible accounts. The above-quoted biblical writers were
(leaving inspiration out of view) ibr the most part eye-witnesses
and participators in the events recorded, or else were in a situa-
tion which enabled them to collect and compare original docu-
ments and traditions in regard to former national events. These
traditions go back to the very cradle, to the very first origin of
the Hebrew nation, and so far as regards the great chain of
events, their credibility cannot be denied — for as to the attend-
ant circumstances and what is perhaps only figurative represen-
tation, the case is different.''

1838.] Judgment of the Bistariam. 447

Of all the historians of the latest times who are really impor*
tant, or are so regarded, there is left for the opposers of the
Pentateuch not a single one. They have to satisfy themselves
with people like Mannerty who in his Handbuch d. alien Oe^
echichte (Manual of Ancient History), Berlin, 1818, already
forgotten, or which rather came dead into the world, does to be
sure talk in their style. It is sufficient, in order to characterize
him, to quote such passages as follows : S. 12, '' The superior-
ity of man to brutes consists only in his fingers, his erect form,
and language. The elements of reason are possessed also by
' other animals ;' " and S. 6, where a tremendous blow is lev-
elled against the flood in these words : ^^ The thought at once
arises, how could a righteous God destroy the innocent brutes
because guilty men had broken his laws ?" The good man
ought certainly to abstain from eating flesh ; nay, the slaying of
beasts is m this view a kind of fratricide, and the eating of them
a Thyestian feast. Men of this way of thinking are worthy of
no notice even were they more gifted than the one before us.
Where all sense for that which is high and noble is wanting,
and where there is a real hatred for that which is divine, there
one's historical conscience is of no more avail on the subject of
the sacred history, and the historian becomes the bad theolo-
gian. Neither would we acknowledge the philosophizing his-
torian as competent in this field. Were history sold into the
service of some philosophical system, as e. g. the Hegelian,
then indeed the case might occur of a friendly agreement be-
tween the historian and the pseudo-theologian. For as the lat-
ter, so the former of these, does not examine the materials be*
fore him with tender conscientiousness, indififerent what kind
of results he arrives at ; but he is only concerned to make his
materials coincide with his predetermined views ; and these, in
the case of the new philosophical systems now in vogue, do not
admit of the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch. But until
this bar/rain is completed, such a coincidence can never be cer-
tain. Rankers History of the Popes is a pledge that for history
better times are coming.

We add to all this that with the most important historians of
the latest times, is associated also the most disiiwuished chro"
nologisL IdeieVj in his Handhuch des Chronou>gie (Manual
of Chronology), Berlin, 1825,. not only takes for granted
throughout the Mosaic origin of the law, but also expre^y de-
clares it. So, for example, Th. I. S. 479 : ^* During their for-

448 Views of the Early Refi>rmer$. [April

ty years' wandering through the stony and desert Arabia, their
leader gave them a constitution which was not to be put fiilly
into operation until they had entered the promised Canaan, the
original country of their nomadic ancestors. This constitution had
for its sole design to make them an agricultural people. This is
shown by their calendar, by which the observance of their pre-
scribed feast days and their sabbaths was regulated." Ilie
chronologist tries the genuineness of the book especially in re-
ference, as is proper, to his own science ; and as he finds all
right here, and just as it would have been, had the book been
genuine (compare e. g. ^. 508), he leaves unregarded the loud
exclamations of the theologians.

[To be conUnaed.]*

ARTICLE V.

What were the Views entertained bt the Early Re-
formers, ON THE Doctrine of Justification, Faith,
AND THE Active Obedience of Christ ?

By the Bev. R. W. Landto, JeffenonTillei PiK.

" Incidere in falsae opinionis errorem, prinsquain yera cognoicai, imper-
iti anixni est et simplicia : peneyerare yero in eo, poatquam agnoyeria, oon-
tiimaciae." — Vide Salviam Epist. ad ^prum et Verum.

ifUroduction.

In itself considered, the views entertained on these subjects
by the venerable men referred to, is a matter of minor impor-
tance. They were men like ourselves, and liable to err. out

* The author in the remaining part of this Article attributes the
origin of the denial of the genuineness of the Pentateuch, by the
theologians of Germany, to the prevalence of Mituralism — Panihe-
ismj—lhe fashionable opinions of sin and Holiness — Aversion to iht lead'
ing personages oj the JPenfateuch — Incapacity of entering into the spirit
ofiij and (he stagnation offundamentai study. The discussion is io-
teresting and instructive, and we regret the necessity of deferring it
to a iuture No. of the Repoeiiory. — ^Ed.

1838.] haroductim. 449

the question assumes importance from the fiict that, by most, if
not all, in the present age, who embrace the system of doctrine
called Calvinism, it is tacitly admitted, and that by those who
profess a rigid adherence to that system, it is earnestly contend-
ed that the views of the early Reformers on the strbjects em-
braced in the foregoing question, were strictly in accordance
with truth. The doctrine oi justification by faithy has ever
been regarded as the ^' distinctive doctrine of the Reformation ;"
and however erroneous the views of the reformers may have
been on other points of theology^ all true Calvinists agree tha^
on this point they were substantially correct. It is this doc-
trine which Luther has so finely denominated the '' Articulus
vel stantis vel cadentis ecclesiae."

But intimately interwoven with their conceptions of this doQ-
trine were, of necessity, their views of faith, and of the obedi-
ence of Christ. We must, therefore, be fully possessed of their
belief on these topics, or we cannot have a distinct understand-
ing of their views of the doctrine of justification by faith. Hence,
although it was primarily our intention to treat in this Article,
on the subject of justification only, we have judged it important
to accompany our examination of that doctrine, with a view of
the other points referred to.

The bearing which a consideration of these topics must have
upon some of the agitating controversies of the times, will be
apparent to many. It is, however, foreign itom the intention
of the writer to mingle in these controversies. It is bis desire
to treat this subject not as a controvertist, but as near as may be,
with the calm impartiality of a historian. In illustration of the
positions which he may attempt to establish, he will simply re-
ler to plain j undeniable matters of fact. If in any instance he
should deviate from this rule, it will be. from the infirmity to
which he is subject in common with his fellow men. He wish-
es not to descend to disputation. The tears and the blood of a
lacerated Zion, already sufficiently proclaim, that in the con-
troversies which have been, and which still exbt, the elements
of human imperfection have been too largely blended.

It is, however, to be lamented, that in the controversies re-
ferred to, there have been manifested mudh confusion of views
and not a little want of information respecting the real teachings
of Calvin and the other reformers. Some, who profess to be
the strict and uncompromising disciples of these venerable men,
and who have perseveringly urged the discipline of the church
Vol. XI. No. 30. 57

450 Views of the Early Reformers. [April

against those who differ from them In their views on the topics
in question, have themselves advanced positions, as essential to
Calvinism, which it has appeared to the writer were never
maintained by Calvin, or the reformers of his time : and have
also censured others as heretical for maintaining positions which
are precisely those which Calvin and his associates defended as
the doctrines* of the reformation.*

* To illustrate these positions fully, before we proceed to eetablish
them, we beg Jeave to refer to one of the cases which has been for
years agitating the Presbyterian chucch in America. It may be com-
pendiously stated as follows : The Rev. George Junkin, D. D., presi-
dent of the Lafayette College in Easton, Pa., tabled a series of charges
against the Rev. Alben Barnes of Philadelphia ; the tenth of which
series is the following : ^ Mr, Bonus teaches in opposition to the <toii-
dards, that justification is simply pardonJ* Dr. Junkin endeavors to
establish this charge by a number of quotations from a work of Mr.
Barnes entitled " Mies oii Romans .*" after which he sums up the
evidence as follows : ** Now that Mr. Barnes makes the whole of jus-
tification consist in pardon, forgiveness, remission of sins, is just as
true as the assertion 1 made in the ninth charge. For if he rejects^
as I suppose is proved, the active obedience of Christ, of course there
is nothing left but pardon. But let us attend to the other proofs in
order. 1. He makes acquitting them from punishment and admitting
them to favor, as equivalent to justification. He makes the word to
justify, to mean ' to treat as if innocent, to regard as timoeenf, to par-
don, to forgive.' This is the charge in terms. 2. He denies that the
righteousness becomes ours, but that it is God's plan ibr pardoning
sin. 3. Again, * pardon or justification' are synoaymes. ^Righteous,
justified, free from condemnation,' equally explicit, etc." See " Ftii-
cftcaiion" by Dr. Junkin, p. 132,133. The principles advanced in
tills work of Dr. Junkin have received the decided approbation of
many others in the church of which he is a minister.

To the foregoing allegations Mr. Barnes thus replies : ** I have not
taught what is here charged upon me, but the very reverse. So far
from teaching that juHtification is merely pardon, I have, in the very
passages under consideration taught that God regards and treats the
sinner who believes in Christ as if he was righteous, and that solely
on account of the merits of Christ, irrespective of any good deeds or
desert of the sinner, whatsoever. — it is true that pardon, in the divine
arrangement implies justification as certainly to exist. But it is ^•
eaiLse God has so arranged it; and not because pardon is the same
thing as justification." See « Defence^' p. 261— 2G2.

This case which we have thus presented, will serve to show the
necessity that exists for a thorough investigation of this subject ; es-
pecially, if there be a probability of its being attended with but the
partial restoration and promotion of confidence among brethren*

1688.] bitroduction. ' 451

Having longjbelieved that the present state of the church of
Christ imperiously calls for an investigation of this subject, the
writer of this Article has been for a number of years bestowing
upon it what attention he was able. He has sought to acquaint
himself thoroughly with the system of Calvinism as it came
fiom the hands of the reformers who flourished during the first
century of the reformation ; that is, before the period arrived,
when protestants, beginning to attend more to the points on
which they differed, than to those on which they agreed, even-
tually proceeded in introducing into the church the agitating
and withering storms of interminable controversy. So early as
A. D. 1625, we find the venerable Abraham Scultetus bewail*
ing such a state of things as follows : Ai nostra juvenitu, etc.,
*^ Even our young men have at length got to paying more at-
tention to human writings^ than to those which are divine.
They adopt in relation to them the Horatian precept : Read
them by day, and study them by nigkt. They are more learn-
ed in the definitions of men than m those of the word of life.
Not like Apollos, powerful in the Scriptures ; but they excel
in that knowledge which is the greatest curse to the church.
For the sake of disputation they neglect sermonizing^ disregard
the study of language, and never seriously think of investigating
the genuine sense of the Scriptures. They do not bring forth
the sense of the text, nor expound it to their hearers, nor show
them how It may be applied for consolation and instruction.
They make themselves ridiculous with the learned, while be-
fore the poor and ignorant they dispute in the jargon of the
schools; or announce that for the word of God, which is not in
the word of God." The existence of such a state of things at
so early a date will sufficiently justify our selection of the first
century of the Reformation as the purest ; and as the period
best calculated to make known the doctrines of the reformers
unencumbered with useless scholastic distinctions. To Calvin-
ism as it came from the hands of the reformers of that period,
. the writer b prepared to subscribe, with but little modification ;**

* The modification referred to, relates principally to the extent to
which they carried out their views of tlie purposes of God. It can*
not be denied that in the general, (nor do I now recollect one instance
of distinct disavowal,) they asserted the reprobation of infants dying^
in infancy. Vide e. g. Calvin^ Instit Lib. II. c. 1. § 6, and Lib. IIL
c 23. § 7, and Lib. IV. c. 15. § 10, and Piscatory Append, ad Tract,
de OraL Dei, Jok, ScharpiuSf De Reprobatione, Par. II. Arg. XI., Ti-*

452 Views of the Early Reformers. [ApRn.

and be has undertaken the laborious course of study referred to
because it appeared to be the only satisfactory method left of
ascertaining what are the essential doctrines of the system. He
has satisfied himself; and having compared the system with the
word of God, he is prepared to meet with cheerfulnctss whatever
consequences may result from adopting for his text-book, the
" InstitiUes^^ of the illustrious Calvin.

The doctrine of justification by faith, as we have already in-
timated, has ever been regarded by protestants as the great and
distinctive doctrine of the Reformation. And if there be a doc-
trine on which the followers of Calvin and Luther in the pre-
sent day, will unhesitatingly, concede that the views of the
primitive reformers were sound — this is the doctrine. It was
at the peril of their lives that they rescued this pillar in the
temple of God's eternal truth from the rubbish which impious
bands had been heaping upon it for agc^s. And while it is true
that persons who have to a limited extent departed from their
views of this doctrine, may still be regarded as sound, in the
general, it must yet be admitted that those who entertain on
this subject the views which they entertained cannot be regard*
ed by Vahinists as unsound. To this last canon all their pro-
fessed followers will readily subscribe.

The topics which will form the subject of the present inves-
tigation it is our intention to take up and consider in the order
of their announcement in the question at the head of this arti-
cle. We shall therefore commence with the doctrine of justifi-
cation.

leniu, Syntag. De Predestination e, Dr. Francis Gomar, Opp. Tom. II.
p. 279, Dr. Amandus PoUmus, Syntag. Lib. IV. c. 10. Thes. IL and
I v., Dr. Tmsse of England, etc. Their method of treating the sub-
ject shows that the principle was extensively, if not universally ac-
knowledged amongst them. We extract an instance from one of the
last named divines, for the classical reader. Dr. Polanus is treating
upon the efficient cause of reprobation ; and he thus speaks : '* Si de-
creti reprobationis causa efficiens est peccatum turn aut originate erit
aut actuale. At originate peccatum decreti reprobationis causa hon
est, quia sic omnes homines nnturaliter nascentes reprobati fuissent,
qaum omnes peccato originali sint infecti. Neque enim actuale pec-
catum est ejus causa, quia sic nulli infantes, etiani blasphemorum Ju-
daeonim, Turcarum, et aliorum Gentiliuni, vel in utero materno vel
paulo post nativitatem mortiii essent a Deo reprobati. Ergo, etc.*'
This, however, was only an excrescence, and not an essential feature
of the system.

1888.] AutificeOion. 453

^ L Views entertained by the Reformers on the doctrine of

Justification.

It has been with unaccountable singularity maintaiDed in our
own time that the term justification is of recent coinage.''^ All
the reformers, however, employ the terra justificatio. Hence
it must be at least upwards of three hundred years old. Not
only this, but the schoolmen use it : e. g. Thomas Aquinas^
who was bom A. D. ] 254. Nor is this all : for we find it of
very frequent occurrence in an author who stands deservedly
high in the estimation of all true Calvinists : We refer to Au*
gustine, who was bom fifteen hundred years ago. The term is
likewise employed by Ambrose, Oecumeniusy etc. etc.

But, as we have already remarked, it is foreign from our in-
tention to mingle in the agitating controversies now pending in
the American churches on this subject. Yet we hope, to be
pardoned, if, in treating this subject historically, we find it ne-
cessary to refer to some facts of recent occurrence in relation to
these controversies. If in so doing we should give ofifence, it
will be altogether unintentional, as our sole object by such re-
ference is to place before our readers the views on this subject,
which have been pronounced erroneous, as well as those which
have been approved, and thus to enable them at once to compare
such views with those entertained on the like points by the re-
formers themselves ; whose views it b our intention to present as
fully as the limits which are allowed us will permit.

The disputes referred to in a note on a preceding page, have
excited the deepest interest in a large denomination of American
Cfiristians. The whole deqomination appears to be nearly
equally divided in relation to it. Lieaming and talent of the
first order are found on either side. Those who are charged
with maintaining that justification is synonymous with pardon,
have been pronounced on that account sufiSciendy unsound in
the faith to warrant their coerced separation from those who as-
sume the opposite ground ; and it is affirmed that their specu-
lations and views seriously endanger, if they do not entirely
subvert the doctrine of justification by faith alone ; the great
leading doctrine, and very pillar of the Reformation.!

* ** Justification is a modem Latin word, coined to express a par-
ticular thought." "" Dr. Jun kin's ViDdicatioD," p. 134.

t See '* Trial of the Rev. Albert Baraea before the Synod of Phil-
adelphia in Session at York, Pa. Oct 1835.** pp. 154—335.

454 ' Views of tke Early lUfarmers. [ Apku.

On the contrary tbey who have been thus charged and their
brethren who agree with them^ maintain that they do not hold
that justification^ and pardon, or remission of sin,are one and
the same thing. And further ; that even if they had avowed
this belief, they would not thereby have materially departed
from the doctrine of the Reformation, and that therefore they
cannot consistently be pronounced heretical on this subject, un-
less the noble army who achieved the Reformation share a sim-
ilar fatCi As we are about to enter upon an investigation of
the subject in controversy, may the Great Head of the church
vouchsafe his blessing upon our feeble efibrts, that, to some ex-
tent they may heal the dissensions of his blood-bought Zion,
and tend to the restoration of confidence and peace within her
borders.

The position which we expect to establish is that the re-
formers employed the terms pardon^ or forgiveness', andjustifi*
cation interchangeably^ and really as synonymes. Our quota-
tions will be brief, and such as, we doubt not, will prove satis-
factory to all who candidly regard them. By way of introduc-
tion to this part of the subject we shall furnish the reader with
a specimen or two of the language employed with respect to
this doctrine in the time of the great Augustine and later;
from which we shall pass oh to the first centuries of the Re-
formation.

Our translations are designed to be strictly accurate and as
much condensed as practicable, while, for the satisfaction of the
classical reader, we shall throw the originals of our excerpts into
notes at the bottom of the page.

I. Let us then hear Augustine, the great defender of the doc-
trines of grace against Pelagius. He says, ^' Our sanctuary is
the forgiveness of sins, which is to be justified by his blood.
When God the Father is displeased with us, he considers the
death of his Son m our behalf, and becomes reconciled. My
entire hope is in the death of my Lord. His death is my
merit, my refuge, my salvation, my life, and my resurrection^^ •

If it should be. objected that this writer appears sometimes to

— ^w^M^M^^^^ »fc ■■ I ■ ^^^■^M ^ m^^mm^. i ■ ■ » » ■ ■ ■ ■-■■■■■■ , ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ , ■ ■ i ■■■ ■ ■ ■■ ■ i. -•- ■

* Assylum nostrum remissio peccatorum : quid est justificari sao-
guine ipsiuB. Cum nobis irasceretur, Deus Pater videt mortem filii
8ui pro nobis, et placatus est nobis. — Toca spes raea in morte Domini
est. Mors ejus meritum meum eat, refugium meuro, salua mea, vita
et reaurreetio mea. De CimtaU Dsi, Lib. 11, eap. 2, and De TrinOat^
Lib. XDL

1888.] JusHfiaUim. 465

confound sanctifieatioD with justification, we answer, that we
admit it. But let it be remembered that such an objection is
no refutation of the argument from the above quotations.

II. Ambrose was undoubtedly the most correct, as a theolo-
gian, of any of his age. He was Augustine's contemporary.
In 1 Cor. 1: 4, he remarks : " For. thus is it ordained by God
that he who believes in Christ shall be saved without the deeds
of the law ; freely receiving by faith alone the forgiveness of
sins.*^^

III. Oecumenitu says : " How may we be justified ? By
forgiveness which is in Christ Jesus." f

IV. Bernard (whose testimony is the last that we shall cite)
says that " Christ is made our righteousness by the pardon of
sin^X

We might adduce also the testimony of Justin Martyr^ Ori^
gen, etc., but prefer to pass on to that of the reformers. And
first, we adduce

V. John Calvin. This writer employs the phrases " impu-
t'aiion of righteousness,^ and '^ justification" to mean the same
thing ; and he explains them^both to signify simply ^^^ the par'-
don of sin.^^ This will be manifest from the quotations which
follow.

In his hisiitutes, he lays down the following as a formal defi-
nition of justification. *^ Justification in its plain and simple ac-
ceptation we understand to be that acceptance of us, by which
God regards us, being received into favor, as righteous. And
we affirm that it consists in the forgiveness of sins, and in the
imputation of the righteousness of Christ."^ After which he
goes on to explain himself, and unequivocally declares that jus-
tification is only to absolve from guilt or approve as innocent;
and that '' imputation of righteousness" is only other phraseolo-

* " Quia hoc constitiitum est a Deo, ut qui credit in Christum, saU
vus sit sine opere. Sola fide gratis recipieas peccatorum remissio-

ncm."

f ^'Quomodo sit justificatio? per remissioneni qaam in Christo Je-
8U consequimur." M Manually cap. 22.

X "Christus factus est nobis justitia in absolutione peccatonim."-^
Ser. XXII. in Cant,

§ ^ Nob justificationem simpUciter interpretamur acceptionem, qua
no8 Deus iti gratiam receptos pro ' justia habet. Eamque in peccato-
rum remitsione ae justitiae Christi imputatione poaitam esse dieimus.**

456 VietDs of the Early Sefarmers. [Apbix.

gy for '^ forgiveness of sios/^ * We adduce bis own lan-
guage.

^' Tq justify therefore is notbing else than to absolve from
guilt, (as having been approved innocent), him who had been
adjudged guilty. When therefore God justifies us at the inter-
cession of Christ, he absohes us, not by approving. our own in-
nocence but by the imputation of righteousness ; that we may
be accounted as righteous in Christ who are not so in ourselves.
Thus, in the language of Paul in Acts 13: 38, ^< By this man
forgiveness of sins is declared to you ; and whosoever believeth
in him is justified from all things from which they could not be
justified by the law of Moses.' Here you see that justification
is placed after the remission of sinsy as if exegetically ; you
see plainly that it means absolution ; you perceive that it pre-
ckides works of law ;-that it is the mere lavor of Christ, and
that it is to be received by faith. And further you perceive
that a satisfaction is interposed where it is said that we are jus-
tified from sin through Christ. So also when the publican is
said to have descended from the temple we dare not say that
his righteousness was obtained by any merit of works. . Hiis,
therefore, is said, that after he obtained pardon of sin, he was
accounted righteous before Ood. Righteousness therefore was
not by an approval of works, but by the free forgiveness of
Ood* Wherefore Ambrose elegantly denominates the confes-
sion of sins, legitimate justification. But omitting dispute about
the word, if we enter upon consideration of the thing itself, as
tt is described to us, no doubt will remain. For Paul clearly
designates justification by the* name of acceptation, when he
3ays in Eph. 1:5, 'We are predestinated unto the adoption
through Christ, according to the good pleasure of God unto the
praise of his glorious grace, by which he hath received us into
great favor.' For this is that which he has elsewhere declared
(Rom. 3: 24), that God justifies us freely. But in Rom. 4: 6
— 8, he calls it the inqmtation of righteousness, nor doubts that
it consists in the forgiveness of stns. His words are, * The
man is said by David to be blessed whom God accepts, or to
whom he imputes righteousness without works, as it is written,
Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, etc' (Ps. 32: 1.)

* The apparent discrepancy in the language of Calvin on this aub-
jecty will be rendered perfectly intelligible by the subsequent quota-
tions from Calviniatie divines ; particularly Pareus, Tilenus, etc.

I

1.

1888.] ^uHfieation. 457

I

Here trufy he does not speak of a part of justification^ InU of
it in the whohi Furthermore^ he openly avows the definition
of the word [justification] attached to %t by David^ when he
pronounces them to be blessed to whom has been Wven a free
pardon of sin. Whence it appears that this righteousness of
which he speaks, is simply opposed to guilt,^* * And again,
be says : '^ But Osiander may respond to me in the passage
where Paul says that David describes righteousness without
works in these words : Blessed are they whose iniquities are

* ** JuBtificare ergo nihil altud est, quara eiiin qui reus agebatur,
tanquam approhata innorentla a reatu absolvere. Quum itaque noa
Christ! inieroeaaione justificet Deua, non propriae innocentiae appro-
bntione, aed justitiae imputatione nos absolvit : ut pro jtistis in Cbris-
to censeamur, qui in nobis non sumus. Sic Actorum, cap. 13. (v. 38.)
in concione Pauli : ' Per hiinc vobisannuntiatur remissio peccatorum,
et ab omnibus iis a quibns non potuistis justtiicari in iege Mosis, om-
nia qui credit in eum, jiistificatur.' Vides post remissionem peccato-
rum justificationem hanc velut interpretation is loco pbni : vides aperte
pro absolutione sumi : vides operibus legis adimi : vides merum
Cbristi beneficium esse: vides fide percepi: vides denique interponi
satisfactionero, ubi dicit nos a peccatis justificari per Christum. Sic
quum publicanus dicitur (Luc. 18: 14) justificatus e tempio decendisse,
non possumus dicere aliquo operum merito consequutum esse justi-
tiam. Hoc ergo dicitur, post impetrataro peccatorum veniam pro
justo esse coram Deo habitum. Justus ergo fuit uon operum appro-
batione, sed gratuita Dei absotutione. Q,uare eleganter Ambrosius,
qui peccatorum confessicnem vocat justificationem legitimam (in Ps.
cxviii. Serm. 10). 4. Atque ut omittamus contentionem de voce, rem
ipsnm si intuemur qualiter nobis describitur, nulla manebit dubitatio.
Nam Paulus acceptionis nomine certe justificationem designat quum
dicit ad Ephesios cap. l.v. 5: * Destinati sumus in adoptionem per
Christum, secundum bene placitum Dei in laudem gloriosae, ipsius
gratiae, qua noa acceptos vel gratioaus babuit.' Id enim ipsum vult
quod alibi dicere solet (Rom. 8: 2i), Deum nos gratuito justificare.
Quarto autem capite ad Romanos (v. 6 — 8), primum appellat justitiae
impulaiiontm : nee eam dubitat in peccatorum remissione collocare.
' fieatus homo (inquit) a Davide dicitur, cui Deus accepto fert vel im-
putat justitiam sine operibus: sicutscriptum eRt,Beati quorum remis-
sae sunt iniquitates,' etc. (Ps. 32: 1.) Illic sane non de justificationla
parte, sed de ipsa tota disputat. Ejus porro definitionem a Davide
positam testatur, quum beatos esse pronuntiat, quibus daturgra^utto
peccatorum venia.* Unde apparet, justitiam hanc, de qua loquitur,
simpliciter reatui opponi." htstituiio. Lib. III. cap, 1 1. 3, 4. TAo-
luck's EdUion, Vol. II. p. 7, 8.

Vol. XI. No. 30. 68

458 Views of the Early Reformers. [AtBXL

forgiven (Rom. 4: 7. Ps. 32: 1). Is this a complete definitioo
of justification, or a partial one ? Most assuredly he does not
adduce the prophetic testimony as if it taught that the pardon
of sins was a part of righteousness ! or that it merely unites with
something else in justifying man ! But David emhraces our
entire righteousness in graimtous forgiveness ; declaring that
man to be blessed whose sins are covered, to whom God remits
iniquities, and to whom he does not impute transgressions.
He estimates and reckons his happiness from thence, that be is
righteous in this manner, not in very deed, but by imputation."*
Further on in the same chapter he remarks, ^* Now let us ex-
amine the truth of that which is afiirmed in tlie definition, viz.,
that the righteousness of faith is reconciliation with God, which
consists alone in the forgiveness of sins. It is an axiom never
to be forgotten that the whole world of mankind are under the
wrath of God so long as they continue sinners. Isaiah beauti-
fully declares this truth in the following words, (chap. 59: 1,
etc.) : ^The Lord's hand is not shortened- that it cannot save:
neither is his ear heavy that he cannot hear : But your iniqui-
ties have made a separation between you and your God ; and
your sins have hid his face from you that he may not hear.'
In this we perceive that sin is a separation between man and
God, a turning of the countenance of God from the sinner. Nor
can it be otherwise, when it is truly foreign from his righteous-
ness to have any intercourse with sin. Whence the apostle
teaches that man is an enemy to God, until restored into favor
by Christ (Rom. 5: 8 — 10). Whom therefore the Lord receives
into fellowship he is said to justify ; because he can neither re-
ceive into favor nor unite man to himself, untU from a sinner
he makes him righteous. We add that this is done by the r6-
mission of sins. For if by their works they be estimated
^hom the Lord reconciles to himself, they will still be found to

* *' Jam vero mihi respondeat Osiander, ubi dicit Paulus describi a
Davide justitiain sine operihuB in his verbis, Beati quorum remissae
sunt iniquitates (Rom. 4: 7. Ps. 32: 1) : Sitne plena haec definitio, an
dimidia. Certe Prophetam non addu<:it testem, acsi doceret portero
jnstitiam esse veniam peccatorum, vel ad hominem justificandura cod*
currere: sed totam jnstitiam in gratuita reipissione includit, beatum
hominem pronuntians, cujus tecta sunt peccata, cui remisit Deua ini*
qaitates, et cui transgressiones oon imputat : felicitatem ejusindeaes-
fimat et censet, quia hoc modo Justus est non re ipsa, sed imputa-
tiooe." Vide ut supra, cap. 11. 11.

1888.] JuitificaHm. 4S9

be truly rinnets, whom, notwithstaDding we must regard as pure
and released fiom an. £ appears therefore^ that those wham
Ood receives into favor, are not othertoise made righteous,
save that their corruptions having been washed away they are
purified by the forgiveness of sins; as such righteousness can
be in one word denominated the forgiveness ofsins.^'^ These
passages place the opinicMis of Qdvin on this subject beyond con-
troversy.

VI. Ursinus is our next witness. He was the writer of the
Heidelberg Catechism ; and a ipan who was not only of the
straitest sect of Calvbists, but in every respect abundantly quali-
fied to teach theology in Calvin's presence and from Calvin's
chair. He was contemporary with Calvin, and died m 1583.
His testimony is very explicit. In hb exposition of the Heidel-
berg Catechism (a book from which more sound theology can
be learned than from almost any other of its size except the
Bible), he remarks Question 60 (p. 339), as follows : ^' Right^
eousness is conformity with law, or the fulfilment of law, or it
is that by which we are righteous before God. Justijicaiionis
the application of righteousness to any one. Hence righteous-
ness and justification differ from each other as the form differs

* '^Nunc illud quam venira sit excutiainus, quod in defiDitione dic-
tum est, justitiam fidei esse reconciiiationem cum Deo, quae sola pec-
catoram reroissiooe constet. Semper ad iJlud azioma redeundum
est, universis iram Dei incumbere, quamdiu peccatores esse perseve-
rant. Id eleganter significavit Jesaiaa hia verbis (59: 1 seq.): *Noo
est abbreviata menus Domini, ut servare nequeat : neque aggravata
auris fjus, at non ezaudiat: sed iniquitates vestrae dissidium fecerunt
inter vos et Deum vestrum, ei peccata vestra absconderunt faciem
ejus a vobis, ne ezaudiat.' Audimus peccatum esse divisionem inter
hominem et Deum, vultus Dei aversionem a peccatore : nee fieri ali*
ter potest, quandoquidem alienum est ab ejus justitia, quicquam com-
mercii habere cum peocato. Unde Apostolus inimicum esse Deo
hominem docet, donee in gratiam per Christum restituitur (Rom. 5:
8—10). Quem ergo Domihus in conjunctionem recepit, eum dicitur
jostificare : quia nee recipere in gratiam, nee sibi adjungere potest,
quin ex peceatore justura faciat. Istud iddimus fieri per peccatorum
remissionem. Nam si ab operibus aestimentur quos sibi Dominus
reconciliavit, reperientur etiamnum revera peccatores, quos tamen
peccato solutes purosque esse oportet. Constat itaque, quos Deua
amplectitur, non altter fieri justos nisi quod abstersi^ peccatorum re-
missione maculis purifieantur : ut talis justitia uno verbo appellari
queat peccatorum remiasio." Ut supra, cap. 11. 21.

460 Views of the Early Reformers. [April

from the application of the form to the subject ; as, for instance^
whiteness differs from making white. But in justification there
is a distinction likewise to be observed. There is a legal justi-
fication and an evangelical. Legal justification is the produ-
cing conformity with God, and with the law in ourselves. This
is begun in us when we are bom again by the Holy Spirit.
Evangelical justification is the application of evangelical rights
eousness ; or it is the imputation of another's righteousness
which is without us, in Christ ; or it is the imputation and ap-
plication of ^Ac righteousness of Christ which he pfocured for
us by dying upon the cross and rising again from the dead.
It is not the transfusion into us of righteousness or of any quali-
ties ; but an absolution from sins in the judgment of God on
account of the righteousness of another. Hence justification
and the forgiveness of sins are the same thing J^^

Again, on Question 61 (p. 345), he says, " We are justified
by faith alone, that is, for the sake of the merit of Christ alone
we receive by faith forgiveness of sins."f Again, on p. 342,
he says, ^^ justifying, in the church, does not signify legally to
make a person righteous, and endued with the quality of right-
eousness, out of one who is unrighteous ; but evangelically, to
absolve an unrighteous person from guilty as if he were right*
eous, and not to punish him; for the sake of the satisfaction
of another imputed to him. Thus the Scripture uses this word ;
and in almost all languages the signification is the same. For
tlie word p^n^»3 to justtjfy, signifies with the Hebrews, to ab-
solve from guilt, to pronounce innocent : See Ex. 23: 7. Prov.

* ^JuslUia est conformitas cum lege, $eu legis impletio, seu rea,
qua justi sumus coram Deo. JustyUalio est justitiae applicatio ad all-
quern. DifTerunt igitur justitia ec justificatio, ut forma et applicatio
formae ad subjecturo, ut albedo et dealbatio seu albificatio. Dividitur
autem justificatio, sicut justitia. Alia est.legalis, aliaevangelica. ht-
gaUs justi/icatio est efiectio conforraitatis cum Deo et lege in nobiv.
Haec inchoatur in nobis,. cum per spiritum Sanctum regeneramur.
Evangelica justificatio est applicatio justitiae evangelicae : seu eet im-
putatjo justitiae alienae, quae est extra nos in Christo: seu est impu-
tatio et applicatio juetitjae Christi, quam pro nobin morieodo in cnice
et resurgendo praestitit. Non est transfusio justitiae aut qualitatum
in nos, sed absolutio a peccatis in judicio Dei propter alienam justi-
tiara. Idem igitur sunt justificatio et remissio peccatorum."

f "Sola igitur fide justificamur, hoc est, propter solius Christi nier-
itum fide accjpimus remissionem peccatoruin.'*

1838.] Jiutificatum, 461

17: 15. ^^Nttiovy sometimes signifies even with the Greeks
dixalov pofilCiiVr to judge or pronounce righteous ; sometimes
noXtt(eiv to affect with punishment, the cause being known in
judgment, Suidas observes : . So Christ says, * By your words
you shall be justified.' Matt. 12: 37. The former signification
is used in a two-fold sense in Scripture ; for either it signifies
not to condemn but to absolve in judgment, as in Rom. 8: 33,
and Luke 18 : 14, or it signifies to acknowledge just, to declare
just,- etc., as in Luke 7: 37, Ps. 51: 6. Rom. 3: 4. And yet
both significatums amount to the same thing. But jusiificarey
though the word often occurs among the Latins, is never em-
ployed in the sense of making righteous, or of implanting a
principle of righteousness : In the Scriptures and in the church,
however, the following unequivocal passages declare that it
is otherwise used ; for they cannot be understood, except of the
absolution of the sinner and his gratuitous acceptance. Rom. 8:
38, * .Who shall accuse the elect of God ? It is God who justi-
fieth;' and Luke 18: 14, ' The • publican went down justifi^
edf that is, absolved from guik and accepted by God rather
than the pharisee. Acts 13 : 38, 39, * Whosoever believetb
is justified from all things from which he could not be justified
by the law of Moses : ' and ' I announce to you the forgiveness
of sins,' etc. In these passages, to be justified^ manifestly sig'
nijies to be absolved, and to receive the forgiveness of sins.
Rom. 3: 24, 25, 28, * They are justified by grace — justifying
him who believes — ^man is justified without works.' See also
Rom. 4: 5. and 5: 9."*

* ** Justificandi verbum in Ecciesia non significare UgaliUfy ex in-
justo jtistum facere, justitiae qualitate indita, sed tvangdict, iDJtistum
in se quasi justum absolvere a reatu nee velle piinire, propter alienam
satiflfhctionem ipsi imputatam. Sic iititur hoc verbo scriptura, neo
alia est signtficatio fere in omnibus tinguis. Nam p^.T^rr justificare
Hebraeis significat reum absolvere, innocentetn prontinciare : Ego non
justificaho impium (Ex. 23: 7). Q,ui justificat impium, et condemnot
insonteii), uterque abominatio Jehovae (Pro v. 17: 1). Amoliovv etiam
Graecis significat alias dixalop pofdisiv, justum censere seu pronun-
Clare : alias moXuSbip supplicio aflScere, causa in judicio cognita, ut Sui-
das annotat Sic Christus : Ex verbis tuts justificaberis. Prior sig-
ntficatio dupliciter nsurpatur in Scriptiira. Vel enim significat non
condemnare, sed absolvere in judicio (Rotn. 8: 3:3). Quis condemna-
hit eUelosDeif Deus est qui justificat (Luc. 18: 14). Deseendit justi-
Jieatus prae illo : Vel significat juslum agnoscere, declarare, etcjiu-
l^o/a est sapientia a JUius suis (Luc. 7: 37). Ut justykeris in str*

46S Views of the Earbf Reformers. [Apru.

Once more ; on page 314, 315, he thus speaks : '^ 7b par^
dan tin ii therefore not to hold sins for no sins, nor is it to be
angry and o&nded with sins, but it b to esteem sinners as no
tinners, to absolve them from the guUt and blame of sins^ and
to repute them just on account of another* s righteousness qp«
prehended and applied by faith. In short, (rod remits sins to
the believing, because he wills not to punish in them those sins
that he punished in Christ the mediator. To have theforgive^
ness of sins therefore and to be righteous before Ood are the
same thing. But it is objected that the law requires not only
that we skould not sin, but that we should likewise perform
obedience ; it requires not only that we should not do evw, but
that we sJumld do good. And that hence it is not sujfficient
that sins should be pardoned, but the perfect obedience of the
law is also necessary in order that we should be righteous.
But to this I answer that e?en the omission of good is itself sin.
* He who can do good, and does it not, to him it is sin.' James
4: 17. But this sin also is remitted to us, because Christ has
made abundant satisfaction for all sins, both of omission and
commission. 'The blood of Jesus Christ cleanses us from all
sm.' 1 John 1: 7. We have therefore in Christ a perfect for-
giveness of all sins of omission as well as of commission ; and
therefore of the sins of omitted obedience; and thus we have
a perfect righteousness, so that we are accounted righteous be-
fore God, by the merit of Christ alone.''* These passages will

monibus tiiis (Ps. 51: 6. Rom. 3: 4). Utraque tamen significatio In
idem recidit. Justificare autero, pro justuro facere, seu justiciae habi-
turn infundere, apud Latinos nusquam reperitur : et ut maximis repe-
riri posset : in Scripture tamen et ecclesta aiiter accipi testaotur haee
manifeata, loca, quae non atiter, quam de absolutione et acceplatioDe
gratuita peccatoris possuot intelligi. Quis acevsabit eledos Dei f Deus
est qui justificaL Publicanus descendit justificatus, boc est, absoluuia
a reatu, et acceptus Deo magis, quam pharisaeus : Ah omnibus, a qui-
bus per Ugem Mosis justifieari non poiuisiis, per hune, quisquis credit,
jusHficatur (Acts 13: 38, ^). Et : annuniio vobis reniissionem ptccaUh
rum, etc. Hie justifieari manifeste significat absolvi, et accifiere re-
mtssionera peccatorum : Jusiykantw gratis, Justificans eum, qui tal
txfde. Hominem justifieare absque operibus. Ex qui non operatur,
sed credit in turn qui Justjficat impium, impuUUur fides sua adjustitiam,
Justificati ejus sanguine. ReconciUati Deo per mortem.'^ Rom. 3: 24,
96, 28, et cap. 4: 5, et cap. 5: 9.

* ** Remittere igitur peccata non est, peccata pro oon peccatis ha-
bere, ye\ peccatis non ofTendi et traaci, sed peccatores habere pro non

1838.] JustifiaUian. 463

suflb^ to make known the views of Dr. Ursinus. We have
others marked for quotation, but shall omit them.

VIL We shall next hear the testimony of Paraeus. He
wrote the work from which I quote, Anno 1598, and is a theo-
logian of splendid intellect and attainments, and one who with
Calvinists has always occupied the very first rank of standard
excellence. In reading the later writers you ofteh meet with
bis name in the following associations^ ^^ Ccdviny Beza^ Parae^
ttf." Paraeiu and Hutterusyoi whom, the first b the Alpha
of the Calvinists> the second the Beta of the Lutherans. His
very name was a terror to the Romish church, as may be seen
by reading almost any of her champions who were his contem-
poraries ; * and hb powerful Anatame Arminiamtmi spread an
alarm through the Arminian camp, scarcely equalled until Ed'
wards on the Will appeared. In relation to the subject under
discussion this eminent theologian uses the following unequivo-
cal language. '^ The plain and simple sentiment of the Scrip-
tures is, that we are justified for ike sake of the blood and

peccatoribufl, Ben peccatores absolvere a peccatorum reatu et culpa, et
reputara pro justis, propter satisfactionern alienam, fide apprehensam
et appticatani. Breviter : Dens reniittit Gredentibus peeeata, quia
non vult ea in ipsia punire, eo quod puniit in Christo mediatore.
Idem ergo sunt, habere reraraaionem peccatorum, et, esse juatum co-
nun Deo, Conira: hex non tantum requlrit, ut non |)eceamus: aed
etiam ut praesteinuB obedientiam : non tantum ut omittainiis niala»
aed etiam ut faciaraar bona. Ergo non satis est, ut peccata sint con-
donato, aed etiam neceasaria eat perfecta legia praesutio, ad hoc, ut
simiisjnsti. Respond: Etiam omiasio boni est peccatum. Qui enim
poUstfaetn Umumy et non fecit, ei peeeatum est Jacob. 4: 17; Sed
etiam hoc peccatum nobis remittitur : quia Christus pro omnibus pee-
catis tarn omiasionia, quam commiaaionia aufficientissime satiafecit.
Sanguis Jesti Christi pwgat nos ab omni peecatoy I Joban. 1: 7. Ha*
l>emu8 igitur in Christo perfectam remisaionem omnium peccatorum,
tarn omiaaioniss quam commiasionia: proinde etiam peccati omisaae
obedientae, et aic perfectam justitiam : ut unice Christi merito coram
Deo juati reputamur." Vide ad Q^uaest. LVl. 1.

* See, for example, De Pace Germaniae, by Mam Coutzen. The
character of Paraeua is admirably drawn in the following inscriptioo
under hia portrait :

** Augustinus ens calamo, Chrysostomus ore,

Verhi aperire potens myatica senaa Deu
ISdmen eras LaUae turhae^ quae Numen adorat

Romanum, et lapidea,lignaque muta colit."

464 Vietffs of the Early Reformers. [Apbii.

dettth of Christy and that our justificadon is the forgiveness of
sins.^^ * " Tii€ Scripture aejines our whole justtjicaium by
the forgiveness of sins for the sake of the hhod of Christ.
Therefore the effusion of his blood alone is that of which we
are justified by imputation. And the forgiveness of sins is
our complete justijkaiion — to be absolvedyto be justified^ to be
forgiven, are the same,^^ f "I affirm unbesitatiDgly that the
uniiorm language of the entire Gospel is that we are justified by
the death and blood of the Son of God, and that our justificW'
tion consists in the forgiveness of sins alone. — ^But thou repli*
est that the punishment of sin is not sufficient to constitute
righteousness, but also the iulfilment of the law is required.
To this I answer J that the punishment is itself the fulfilment of
the law ; hence therefore it is sufficient. For the law is fulfill-
ed in a twofold manner ; either by the performajice of perfect
obedience ; or, if it has been violated, by the suffering of a suf-
ficient punishment. Each mode satisfies the justice of God ;
and in each mode therefore the law is fiilfiUed and righteous-
ness obtained." % We would gladly extend this quotation, but
our limits forbid.

Again ; in considering objections he thus remarks : (the
reader will please to pay especial attention to this quotation, as
it will explain the apparent contradiction in the language of
Calvin, as remarked on a former page), '^ But you will say that

some celebrated theologians teach that justification consists in

-

* ^ Scripturae phrasis plana sententia simplex est ; nos justificari
propter sanguinera et mortem Cbristi, et justificationem nostram esse
reroisaioiiera peccatorum/'

f ^ Scriptura totam justificationem nostram dofinit remissione pec-
catonmi propter sanguinem Chrtsti : Ergo sola sanguinis effusio est
Id cujus impiitatione justificnmur : et remissio peceatorum est tota
nostra justificatio. — Hie absolvi^ jiutificarij habere rcmissionem peeea-
torumf idem valent."

\ "Veriorem dico, quia constnns vox est totius Evabgelii, nos jus-
tificari morte et sanguine filii Dei, et justificationem nostram in sola re-
missione peceatorum consistere. Testimonia Evangelii supra sunt
recitata. — At, inquis, ad justitiam non satis est poena pro peccato, sed
et requiritur impletio legis. Resp. Etiam poena est imptetio legis.
Ergo sufficit. Dupliciter enim lex impletur vel per obedientiae per-
fectae praestationem, vel cum haec est violata, per sufficientis poenae
perpessionem : Utraque satisfit justitiae Dei. Utraque igitur est legis
impletio, est justitia et dutaiiafiaJ"

1838.] Juitijicatian, 465

the forgiveness of sins, and the imputation of righteousness } and
that therefore it does not consist in forgiveness alone. 1 on-
stoevy that neither do I deny that it consists in these. But how ?
as integral parts, neither of which is the whole of justification ?
By no means ; but as acts differing in reason only, not in sub-
ject ; in respect of the different ^ terminos a quo, and ad quam^^
etc. As, for example, the whiting of a wall is by tlie expulsion
of blackness and the coating over with whiteness ; yet it is one
and the same act by which the wall is whitened and blackness
removed, and so on the contrary. Therefore they are one ac-
tion differing only in reason. The filling up of a vessel is by
the removal of vacancy, and the infusion of liquor, yet they are
done by one and the same act ; as when a person is clothing
himself, it is but one and the same act by which the body is
clad, and nakedness overcome. Still, both are accomplished
by the same single act. Thus therefore in justification Twhich
is not unlike being clothed), the forgiveness of sins and the im-
putation of righteousness unite ; not «s separate actions or parts,
but as acts differing in term only. For God by forgiving our
sins for the sake of the righteousness of Christ, imputes that un-
to us, and by imputing that to us he remits oar sins. Hence
therefore these are customarily joined together in justification^
not so much comdati'oely as exegetically, the latter implying the
former." * We need yet to add only the following passage

* ** At, ioquies, theologi praedicti docent justificationem eonstare
reminione peccatorum et imputatiooe juatitiae. Ergo non constat re-
miflvione sola. Resp, Nee ego nego his eonstare. Bed qoomodo ?
an ut partibus integraltbus, quarum neutra sit tota jintifieatio ? Ne-
quaquam : sed ut accibus, ratione tantum, non subjecto difibrentibus,
reapectn difierentiuin teraiinorum a quo et ad quern : qualibua con-
stare Solent actiones, quae fiunteontrariorum immediatorum a^nt ««t
^M-M quaeque cum re ipsa et subjecto sint una actio, tanien disringuun*
tur T^ Xoyi^ et respectu. Verbi causa dealbatio parietis sit polsione
Digredinis, et aqiersioue albedinis: simul tanien et eadem actione,
qna haec aspergitur, ilia pellitur, et contra. Ideo sunt una actio ra-
tione tantum differens. Ropletio vasis sit pulsione vacui, et infiwione
liquoria : utraque tamen sit una actione vestitura, ut sic loquar, qua
vestitur corpus, sit regendo meditatera et applicando vestem. Eadem
tamen actione sit utrunique. Sic igitur in justificatione, (quae vesti*
turae non est absimilis,) concurrunt remissio peccatorum et iroputatio
justitiae non ut diTcraae actiones re\ partes, sed ut actus terminis di^
ferentes. Nam Deus remlttendo nobis peceata propter justitiam

Vol. XI. No. 80. 69

466 Vtetffs of the Early Reformers, [ Apul

from this great divine : '< The distinctions between being not
unrighteous and being righteous, between not transgressing the
law and fulfilling it, between being not dead, and being alive,
have more in them of what is subtle, than of what is true ! for
they are terms which truly * signify the same thing. For be
who is not unrighteous before God, is necessarily righteous ; he
who does not transgress the law, fulfils it ; and he who is not
dead, is alive, etc. If by the imputation of the passive obedi-
ence of Christ we are not as yet righteous, but only not un-
righteous, how can it be true that we are justified by the blood
of Jesus ? reconciled by his death, etc ? If the forgiveness of
sins is not complete justification, how can it be true that blessed
is the man whose iniquities ere forgiven 1 Rom. iv. And how
did the apostle take the phrases to impute righteousness^ and
not to imptUe sin^ to mean the same thing ? — If it is not by the
passive, but by the active obedience of Christ that we are justi-
fied, how is Christ not dead in vain ? for why was it necessary
for Christ to die, and by dying to merit forgiveness of sins for
us, if righteousness had been merited for us by his living holily
and righteously ? For righteousness necessarily presupposes
forgiveness of sins." *

VIII. Melancthon, in his Common Places, remarks : " Jus^'

Christi, eandem iiuputat, et earn imputando peccata remittit. Con*
jungi ergo baeo solet in justificatione non tarn copulative quam eze-
getice, ut posterius declarat prius."

* DiBtiDctiones inter non injustiim et juBtum esse, inter legem
non transgi^di» et legem implere, inter non mortuum et vivum esse :
plus habent subtilitatis, quam veritatis, cum revera sint termini aequi-
pollentes, ut postea ostendam. Necessario enim qui coram Deo non
eat injustUB est Justus : qui legem non transgreditur implet : qui non
est roortuuB, vivit : siquidem haec omnia sunt contraria ofisaa : quo*
rum uno posito, vel negate, necesse sit poni vel negari alterum. Si
passivae obedientiae imputatione nondum sumus justi, Bed tantum non
i^juBti quomodo varum illud : justificati per sanguinem filii ejaa : re-
conciliati per mortem, etc. Si romiBsio peccatorum non est juatifica-
tio tota : quomodo varum illud : Beati quorum rtmxssite suni iniqui-
tates : Rom. iv. et quomodo ApostoIuB Ibidem pro eodem Bumit, imjni^
tore justiHam^ et, non impvtare peccatum ?— Si non pasaiva aed activa
obedientia CbriBti justificamur: quomodo ChristuB non eat fniadra
mortuuB? Quid enim necesse erat Christum mori et moriendo mereri
nobis remisaionem peccatorum : al juste et sancte vivendo jam meri*
tua nobis erat justitiam ? Justitia enim remisaionem |>eccatorum ne-
•eoario praasupponit"

1888.] JustificatUm. 467

ttfication signifie$ forgiveness of sins, or, tbe acceptance of a
person to life eternal."*

IX. We shall now refer to several Confessions of Faith.
Our first is the French Confession,

" We believe that our whole justification is founded in the
forgiveness of our sins^ in whim also our felicity entirely con^
tistSy as David says. Therefore we reject all other means of
being just before God ; and presuming not upon other merits
and virtues, we rest simply upon the obedience of Jesus Christ,
which is imputed to us, that all our sins may be covered, and
we obtain favor before God. — We believe that we become
partakers of this righteousness by faith alone, as it is written :
He suffered to purchase salvation for us," etc.f Articles 18, 20.

X. We cannot pay much attention to the order of time, and
shall next refer to the Augustan (or Augsburg) Confession.
It was written A. D. 1530. '' The churches likewise teach, that
men cannot be justified before God by their own strength, merits
or works, but that they are justified by grace through faith, for
the sake of Christ, when they believe that they are received
into favor, and that their sins have been forgiven on account of
Christ, who by his death made satisfaction for our sins. This
faith God imputes to us as righteousness, Rom. 3: 4."|

* ^Justificatio significat remissionem peccatorum, sea accepta-
tioneHi personae ad vitam aetemam.'' Locis Communxbus, See also
his Preface to Vol. III. of tbe Works of Lutber.

t Not being in poasesffion of a Latin copy of this ConfesBion, wo
have been obliged to consult the French version. *' XVIII. Nous
eroyons, que toute notre justice est fondle en la remission de noe pe*
ehez, com me aussi c'est notre seule f^licit^, comme dit David. C'est
pourquoi nous rejettons tous ies autres moyens de nous pouvoir jus-
tifier devant Dieu : et sans presumer de nulles vertus ni raerites, nous
nous tenons simplement k I'obeissance de Jesus-Cbrist laquelle nous
est allou^e, tout pour couvrir toutes nos fautes, que pour nous faire
trouver grace et favour devant Dieu. — XX. Noua croyons que nous
sommes faics panicipans de cette justice, par la seule foi ; comme il
est dit, qu'il a souffert pour nous acquirir le salut''

I ** Item decent, quod homines non possint justificari coram Deo
propriis viribus, mentis aut operibus, sed gratis justificentur propter
Christum per fidem, cum credunt se in gratiam recepi, et peccata re-
mitti propter Christum, qui sua morte pro aostris peccatis satisfecit
Hanc fidem imputat Deus pro justitia coram ipso. Rom. 3 ; 4.
Art. IV."

468 Views of the Early Reformers. [ Apbil

XL The Saxony Catechism, firamed Anno 1571. ^^ 3%e
forgiveness of sin differs not from justification. Hence justifi-
cation is defined to be remission of sins, reconciliation with God,
imputation of righteousness, and acceptance to life eternal."*

XII. Not having the original of the following Confession
(the Belgic) by me, I am c^liged to make the subsequent ex-
tract from a miserable abridgement, and even a perversion of
the ^ Harmony of Confessions/ recently published in America.
It reads thus : '^ We believe that all our happiness consists in
the forgiveness of sins, which we have by Jesus Christ, and
that in it alone all our righteousness is contained, as St. Paul
teacheth, out of the prophet David, who declareth the happi-
ness of those men to whom God imputeth righteousness without
works. And the same apostle saith, Rom. iii. and iv. that
^ We are justified by the redemption made in Christ Jesus.'
We therefore, leaning upon this as a sure foundation, do yield
all glory to God, having a most base and humble opinion of
ourselves, knowing full well who and what manner of creatures
we be indeed. Therefore we do not presume of ourselves, or
of any of our own merits, but being upholden by the holy obe^^
dience of Christ crucified, we do rest altogether in it : and
to the intent it may become ours, we believe on him, TTiis
righteousness alone is allsuMdeni, both to cover all our iniqui-
ties, and also to make us safe and secure against all tempta-
tions," etc. Art. XXIII.

XIU. Wendeline, whose character as a profound and con-
sistent Calvinist, is of the. highest standing, shall be our next
witness. On pp. 565 — 590 of his Christian Theology, we
meet with the following language : ^^ Evangelical Justification
is that by which a sinner is absolved from the curse of the law,
and by grace accounted righteous before God, for the sake of
the righteousness or merit of Christ, apprehended and applied
by true faith. Legal justificatiofi is that by which any one is
pronounced righteous in himself, from his own inherent right-
eousness and innocency. Before the divine tribunal no one is
justified, that is, absolved from the curse of the law, and pro-
nounced itinocent and righteous, except by evangelical right-
eousness and justification. For as many as are of the works

* "Remissio peccatoruni et jiistificatio non difierunt. Ideo justifi-
catio definitur, quod sic reniiiKsio peccatorum, reconciliatio cum Deo,
impulatio jdstitiae, et acceptatioad vitam aetcrnam " Catechesis Saro-
itm.

1838.] Juitification. 469

of the law are under the curse. Gal. 3: 10. And it i$ manifest
that no man can be righteous with Qod hut by the law,
V. 11.*' •

Agaia : <^ Theologians remark that forgiveness of sins or
absolution from the curse, and the imputation of the righteous-
ness of Christ, are not two integral parts of justification, or two
acts really and numerically distinct : but only one act respecting
the two ' terminos a quo and ad quemJ Even as by one and
the same act darkness is expelled from the atmosphere and
light introduced into it ; so by one and the same act of justifi-
cation, the sinner is absolved ftom guilt and pronounced right-
eous. Whence we are sure that they express the whole nature
of justification who affirm that it consists in the forgiveness of
sinsy and also those who affirm that it consists in the imputation
of righteousness. Because, when God forgives our sins, he
pronounces us righteous through the imputation of the right-
eousness of Christ : and when he pronounces us righteous
through the imputation of the righteousness of Christ, he for-
gives our sins." f Again : " But that we ^tb justified before
God, that is, absolved from the curse of the laWy not by our
inherent righteousness, but by the righteousness of Christ im-

* ^ Evangelica justyiccUio est, qua peccator absolvitur a oialedic-
tione legis, at Justus refutatur coram Deo gratis, propter Christi justi-
tiam 86U meritum vera fide apprebensum ac applicatiim. LegcUis
justtfiealio est, qua quis Justus pronunciatur in se propria suo et in-
haerente justitia ac innocentia. Coram tribunal! divino nemo justifi-
eatur, hoc est, a maledictiooe legis absolvitur, innocensque et Justus
proDUDciatur nisi juslUia etjustificatume Evangelica. ^uotquot enim
ex operibus Ugis, siib txtcraUone sunt, Gol. 3: ]0. Et numtfestum est
nullum per legem justificari apud Deuvu ver. 11."

t ''Notant theologi, remissionem peccatorum sed absolutionem
a maledictione, et imputationem justitiae Christi non esse duas justi-
ficationis partes integrantes, vel actus numero et realiter distinctos ;
sed unum esse duntaxat actum duos respicientem terminus, a quo et
ad quern : veluti uno eodemque actu tenebrae ex aere peiluntur, et
lumen in aerem introducitur, sic uno eodemque justificationis actU
peccator a reatu absolvitur et justos pronunciatur. Unde cotiigimus
eos totam justificationis naturam exprimere, qui aiunt earn in remis-
siooe peccatorum consistere, et qui dicunt earn in imputatione justitiae
coosistere : quia dum remittit nobis Deus peccata, nos justos pronun-
ciat per imputationem justitiae Christi : et dum justos nos pronuuciat
per imputationem justitiae Christi, peccata nobis remittit." Christ,
Thedog. Lib. I. Cap. XXV. p. 587.

470 Views of the Early Reformers. [April

puted to us, we prove in this manner: (i) The material of our
justification before God is nothing other than the righteousness
of Christ, or his obedience to the law accomplished for us.
Therefore we are not justified^ that isj absohedfrom the curse
of the laWy unless by and on account of the righteousness of
Christ imputed to us»" ^ — ^' The justification of the wicked is
by imputed righteousness. But the justification of the Chris-
tian is the justification of the wicked. Therefore the justifica-
tion of the Christian is bv imputed righteousness. The propo-
sition is thus proved : Because the justification of the wicked
is his absolution from punishment " f

XIV. Our next witness shall be Dr. Tilenus of Sedan.
In his SyntagmGy (the date of the preface to which is A. D.
1606) p. 714, he thus speaks : ^' To justify, in the Scripture,
most frequently signifies, to absolve, to pronounce righteous and
innocent, 2 Kings 15: 4. Deut. 25: 1. Is. 43: 9, which also
the antithesis shows in certain places, where * to justify^ and
* to condemn^ are opposed, Prov. 17: 15. Is. 5: 23, and 50: 8.
Rom. 8: 33." %

On pp. 724, 725, he speaks as follows : ^* The forgiveness
of sins, and the imputation of righteousness are not diverse parts
differing in reality, but only in word : for either of the two taken
separately expresses the whole nature of justification^ as ap-
pears from Rom. 4: 6, 7, where the apostle, avowedly treating
upon this matter, uses the phrases to forgive sins and to impute
righteousness as equivalent, although this is stoutly denied by
Bellarmine. The distinction between these two forms of

* ^ Justifieari autem nos coram Deo, hoc est, a maledictione legis
absolvi, Don per inhaereDtem nobis justitiam sed per imputatam nobis
Christi justitiam, probamus: (1) Materia nostrae justificationis coram
Deo alia nulla est, nisi Chriciti justitia, seu obedientia legi pro nobia
praestita. Ergo npn justificamur, hoc est a maledictione non abaol-
vimur, nisi per et propter Cbristi justitiam nobis imputatam." Ihid.

f *^ Justificatio impii est per imputatam justitiam. Atqui justifica*
tio Cbristiani est justificatio impii. Ergo justificatio Christiani sit per
imputatam justitiam. ProposUio prob. Quia justificatio impii est ab-
solutio ejus a poena." Ibid.

X Justificare in Scripture frequentissime significat, absolvere ; jus-
turn et insontem pronunciare. 2 Reg. 15: 4. Deut. 25: 1. Is. 43: 9.
Quod et ostendit antithesis in quibusdam locis, ubi to justificare et
TO condemnare opponuntur. Prov. 17: 15. Is. 5: 23 et 50: 8. Rom. 8:
33." Syntag, Par. II. loe. XLI. Tfus, 2.

1&38.] Justification. 471

speaking, (^not two integral parts of justification) respects the
two ^ terminos a quo^ and ad qtiem,' For, as by one and the
same act, darkness b expelled and light introduced, so a sinner,
by one and the same act of justification, is absolved from guilt
and pronounced righteous. Bettarmine trifles when he pretends
that, with our theologians^ there are conflicting sentiments, tn-
asmuch as one places justification in the imputation of the
righteousness of Christy while another places %t in forgiveness
of sins. This is as if he should contend that a man is clothed
in one way when his nakedness is covered^ and in another way
when his garments are put upon him. As ridiculously as does
this adversary imagine that darkness can he banished j and cold
driven away^ so that neither light nor heat need follow in the
subject body J so sophisticaUy does he allege that forgiveness, of
sins effects only this^ that we thereby escape the punishment of
helly but do not at the same time obtain the rewards of eternal
life. Just as though sin and righteousness were really not so
contrary to each other, as that the one being absent the other
must be necessarily present : or as if hell was to be considered
only as the suffering of the greatest evil, and not the loss of the
great«ist good. Wherefore, if the forgiveness of sins takes
away each part of this punishment, truly it leaves nothing more
to be desired. But neither in the thought, nor even by
dreaming, can there be imagined a being who is both righteous
and unrighteous, — no angel or man, who, although he be not
unrighteous, cannot on that account properly be called righteous.
Just as if any one should dream of an animal that is not indeed
dead^ and yet not living I For death and life, perdition and
salvation, are not more directly opposed to each other in the
mysteries of grace than in nature itself. And hence the authors
and abettors of this opinion have invented a new Tragelaphus^
not unlike the chimera of transubstantiation : imagining acci-
dents to exist, the subject of which cannot be conceived of,
much less ascertained." ^

* " Remissio peccatonim, et iraputatio justitiae, non sunt partes di-
versae, aut distinctae t^ civaf, sed duntaxat t^ Xoyijf : nam utravia
seoreitn sumpta, totam jiistificationjs naturam ezprimit, ut patet, Rom.
4 : 6, 7, ubi Apostolus hoc argumentuin ex professo tractans remit-
tere peccata, et imputare justitiam^ tanquam urodvyafAovrta usurpat,
quamvis hoc proterve neget Bellarroinus. Distinctio inter has duas
loquendi formulas, non duas justificationis panes integrantessed duos
respicit terminos a quo, et ad quem. Nam ut uno eodemque actu,
•t tanabraa ex aera pelluntur, et lumen in aerem introducitur : Sic

479 Views of the Earty Reformers. [Apau.

XV. We bad intended to have quoted some other authorities,
Piscatory for instance, (see Opp. Tpm. I. p. 250,) but think it
needless. We shall therefore close these citations with the tes-
timony of the Synod ofDort, Not having the original Latin
by us, we shall subjoin the English version.*

We believe that our salvation consists^ in the remission of
our sins for Jesus Chrisfs sake^ and that therein our right"
eoiuness before Ood is implied^ as David and Paul teach us,
declaring this to be the happiness of man, that God imputes
righteousness to him without works. And the same apostle
saith, that we are justified freely y by his grace^ through the re-
demption which is in Christ Jesus. And therefore we always
hold fast this foundation, ascribing all the glory to Grod, hum-
bling ourselves before him, and acknowledging ourselves to be
such as we really are, without presuming to trust in any thing

homo impius uno eodemque justificatidbis actu, et a reatu absolvitur,
et Justus pronuDciatur. Nugas agit Bellarminus, cum pugnaotea
theologis Dostris senteniias adfingit, eo quod alius justificationem in
rmputatione justitiae Christi, alius id remissione peccatorum, sitam
esse velit : Pertnde ae si contenderet, aliter hominera vestiri, cum
tegitur ejus nuditas : aliter, cum applicatur ei vestis. Quam inepte
adveraarius ille fingit, tenebras quodammodo fugari, frigus depelli
posse, Ita ut nulla lux, calor nullus in subjecto corpore consequatur :
tarn sopbistice statuit, remissioDem peccatorum hoc tantuin efficere,
ut gehennae poenas evadamus, non item ut coelestis vitae praemia
consequamur. Quasi vero peccatum et justitia non sint contraria
fniitaa, quorum uno sublato, necessario ponitur alterum : aut quaa
gehenna tantum consideranda sit in perpessione suinmi mali, non
etiam in amissione summi boni. Quocirca, si remissio peccatorum
utramque banc poenae partem tollit, certe nihil amplius deelderari
potest Nee vero vel cogitatione, imo ne per somnium quidem fingi
potest subjectum, justitiae et injustitiae dfxriMOv, puta, angelua, aut
homo, qui non quidem sit injusrus : at non propcerea recte poesit vo-
cari Justus : perinde ac si quia animal somniet non quidem mortuum,
minime tamen vivens. Neque enim mors et vita, exitium et salus,
minus immediate opponuntur in mysteriis gratiae, quam in negotio
naturae. Ac proinde hujus commenti autores et assertores novum hie
pingunt Tragelapbum, transubstantiationis chimerae non abaimilem :
accidentia comminiscentes, quorum nullum potest cogitari, nedum
reperiri sabjectum." IM, Loc XLII. Tbes. 9, 10, 11, 12 et la p. 724,
725.

* See '^ The Confession qf FaUk of the Reformed Dutch GhurcA, re-
vised in the national Synod, held at Dordreeht In the years 1618, and
1619." Article XXIII.

1838.] Justification. 473

in ourselves, or in any merit of ours, relying and resting up(m
the obedience of Christ crucified alone^ which becomes ours
when we believe in him ; this is sufficient to cover all our ini*
quities, and to give us confidence, in approaching to God ; free-
ing the conscience of fear, terror and dread, without following
the example of our first father, Adam, who, trembling, attempt-
ed to cover himself with fig leaves."

We omit to make quotations from any others, for reasons al*
ready intimated. In passing however we remark, that the first
reformers, without a solitary exception^ (I speak only of the
eminent ones ; I have read none others), entertained on the
subject before us, views similar to those advanced in the fifteen
foregoing references. Lather, Zuinglius, Wolfgang Musculus,
Oecolampadius, BuUinger, Peter Martyr, Hyperius, etc., etc.,
received with one consent, as the doctrine of God's word, that
we are justified by the death of Christ, when on account of it,
(propter earn, is the uniform expression), we have received the
forgiveness of sins. This position, we believe, may be sus-
tained in the fullest and most satisfactory manner.

The question whether pardon and justification are one and
the same never was agitated until the latter end of the sixteenth
century ; at which time it was started by some obscure individ-
uals in the following form : '^ L the forgiveness of sins the
whole, or only a part of our justification 1 (Sitne remissio peo-
catorum tota, an dimidia nostra justificatio ?) And for some
time after it was started, (with a host of kindred questions), it
attracted but little attention.

When however the subject was ultimately brought up fullr
before the theological world for discussion, the Calvinistic church
almost entirely, at the first, took the ground that pardon was
the whole of JTistification. Some however, with Molinaeus,
(a divine, who is deservedly held in the very first rank of ex-
cellence), took the opposite ground, and the controversy was
long and exciting. Piscator, a man who is still admired and
quoted by our learned Calvinistic theologians, became the chief
antagonist of the views of Molinaeus, and maintained the posi-
tion, that '' the forgiveness of sins and the imputation of right-
eousness, are not two parts of justification." That Piscator
was a strict Calvinist, no one will hesitate to acknowledge, who
has read his works, or who is aware of the estimation in which
be was held by his contemporaries. If we do not greatly wish

Vol. XI. No. 30 60

474. Views of the Early Reformers. [Apkii*

take, the adoption of the opposite principle characterized the
followers of Luther long before it did those of Calvin.

By degrees however, the Calvinistic reformers, as well as
the Lutheran, were led~to make a distinction between forgive-
ness and justification when they treated upon the subject.
They nevertheless still used the terms interchangeably, and as-
serted that either term might be employed for the other with
perfect propriety. That this may be apparent we will present
the language of one or two eminent divines who admitted the
distinction. Our first is Dr. Amand/us Polamis, a great favor-
ite with Dr. Gomar, (whose approbation of an author as sound,
is a pretty fair proof that he is orthodox) who styles him " that
eminent theologian^^^ (egregius theolpgus). He wrote A. D.
1609. On pp. 1460, and 1461, of his celebrated System of
Christian Theology, he thus remarks : " To justify^ is to ab-
solve from death, not to condemn. But it is not the same
thing, properly speaking, as to forgive sins. Because beings
may be justified concerning whom there exists no necessity for
forgiveness ; beings who have no sin, and never committed any,
having perfectly fulfilled the law of God« Thus man would
have been justified without the pardon of sins, if he had not
sinned, but had persisted in rendering obedience to the law.
Thus in a forensic judgment the judge absolves the accused
who is truly innocent although he Joes not forgive him any sin.
The justif cation of the sinner is nothing less than the forgive*
ness of sins^ figuratively ^ that is metonymically ipeaking^ &e-
cause the forgiveness of sins is the formal cause of the justificor
tion of the sinner ^ etc. But properly speaking the justification
of the sinner is not forgiveness itself, btU absolution from con-
aemnation. Neither are absolution from condemnation, and for-
giveness of sins simply the same, because forgiveness embraces
iar more than such release. A person may be absolved from
condemnation who is innocent, and has not sinned, and who
needs not the forgiveness of sins. To be declared that any one
is absolved from condemnation, and has a right to eternal life, is
common alike to legal justification and evangelical. For, as in
human judgments debtors are not only justified by an interven-
ing surety, that is, absolved by the judge and not cast into pris-
on ; but even those who have been accused innocently are ab-
solved, and truly they ought to be absolved. So likewise be-
fore God : sinners are not only absolved on account of Christ,
but even the innocent, as holy angels. Man also, if he had fill-

1838.] Justificatim. 47S

filled the law and had not sinned, would have been justified^
that if, absolved jrom condemnation and freed from eternal
death. Rora. 2: 13." *

And on page 1497, we have the following : *^ Forgiveness
of sins is truly a part of our justification before God. Yet by
synecdoche it is often put for the whole of justification : So
that it is rightly said that the justification of the sinner before
God consists alone in the forgiveness of sins. For the foi^
giveness of sins does not exclude the imputation of Christ's
righteousness, but necessarily presupposes it. Because God
forgives sins to no one unless he imputes to him the satisfaction
and righteousness of Christ. Truly it excludes our merits and
our satisfactions, and whatever modes of justifying before God,
have been thought out by men« So also on the contrary it is
righdy affirmed that Justification before God consists in the alone
imputation of the righteousness of Christ ; for the imputation of
the righteousenss of Christ does not exclude the forgiveness of

* Jusiifieare est absolvere a morte, non condemnare. Id autem non
est idem proprie loquendo quod reinittere peccata : quia justificari
possunt, quibus nulla opus est remissione peccatorum, ut qui nullum
habent, nullumque commlsserunt peccatum, sed perfecte lege Dei im-
pleverunt. Sic justificatus homo absque remissione peccatorum, si
non pecasset, sed in obeequio legis perstitisset : ut dicta de justifica-
tione legali paulo ante citate ostendunt lui in judicio forensi judex
absolvit accusatum, qui vere innocens est, sic ut peccatum ei non re-
roittat. Justificatio peccatoris nihilominus est reraissio peccatorum
figurate niroirum metonymice loquendo, quia remissio peccatorum
est causa formal is justificationis peccatoris: proprie autem loquendo
justificatio peccatoris non est remissio ipsa peccatorum, sed absolutio
a condemnatione ; Sicut anima rationalis non est proprie loquendo
homo, sed causa formalis seu forma homiois. Neque simpliciter
idem sunt absolutio a condemnatione et remissio peccatorum quia ilia
latius patet Potest enim absolvi a condemnatione qui est innocens
et non peccavit, quique remissione peccatorum non eget Declarari,
quod quia absolutus sit a morte aeternae, et jus habeat vitae aeternae,
commune est justificationi legali cum justificatione evangelica. Nam
ut in judiciis humanis non tantum debitores interveniente sponsore
justificantur, id est, absolvuntur a judice ne in carcerem conjiciantur,
sed etiam insontes absolvuntur, et vero absolvi debent : ita eiiam co-
ram Deo non tantum peccatores absolvuntur, sed etiam insontes, ut
Angeli sancti : item homo si legem implevisset et non peccasset fuis-
set justificatus, id est, absolutus a condemnatione atque immunis a
morte aeterna, Rom. 2: IB, qui legem praestant, jiutificabwdur. Vide.
Sirstag: Chris. Theolog. lAb. VI. cap. 36.

476 Views of the Early Reformers. [Apbil

sins, but necessarily infers it. For to any one to whom God
imputes the righteousness and satisfaction of Christ, to him as-
suredly he remits sins. Because be forgives those from his
mere mercy and free love towards us, for the sake of the inter-
cession and satisfaction of Christ the Mediator applied to us by
faith. 1 John 1: 7. Col. 1: 20—22. Rom. 3: 25, etc." *

One more instance will be quite sufficient, and that one b
itself a host. I mean Dr, Francis Gomar^ — a name synony-
mous with all that is fervently pious, able, learned, and ac-
complished. Any one who will read his writings must admit
that it is no wonder that Armvnius shrunk into his appropriate
dimensions under his withering glance. In the folio edition of
his Works, Vol. I. p. 175, col. 1, he discusses the question
" Whether the forgiveness of sins is the entire justification of the
faithful before God, for obtaining eternal life," f in which dis-
cussion he "affirms not only that the first reformers employed the
terms pardon and justification interchangeably, but also that
these terms are thus employed in the word of God: though be
explains it by synecdoche.

Goraar refined more on the theology of the Reformation than
probably any other of his time. He is perpetually distinguish-
ing, and yet you can almost always see some reason for the re-
finement. His followers were exceedingly numerous, (in fact
the whole body of Calvinists were called after him for many
years,) and his refinements with respect to the obedience of

* Est [remissio peccatorum] quidem pars justi6cationis nostne
coram Deo : Synecdochice taraen frequenter pro tota justificatione
ponitur, ita ut recte dicatur justificationem peccatoris coram Deo in
8oia remissione peccatorum coDsistere. Nam remissio peccatorum
Don excludit impumtionem justitiae Christi sed necessario ponit ;
quia uemini Deus remittit peccata, nisi cui justitiani et satisfaciionem
Cbristi imputavit: Verum excludit taotum merita nostra, satisfiic-
tiones nostras et quoscunque modos justifinandi coram Deo ab bomin-
ibus excogitatos. Sicut vicissim recte affirmatur, justificationem co-
ram Deo consistere in sola imputatione justitiae Christi : nam iniputa-
tione justitiae Christi non excludit remissionem peccatorum, sed oe-
cessario infert. Nam cuicunque Deus Imputat justiciarn et satisfac-
tionem Cbristi, eidem certe remittit peccata : quia remittit ilia esse mo-
ra misericordia et gratuito amore erga nos, propter imercessionem et
satisfactionem Christi mediatoris nofttri nobis applicatnm per fidem.
1 John 1: 7. Col. 1: 20, 21, 22. Rom. 3: 25. Eph. 1: 7. Heb. 9: 22, et
cap. 12, 24. Vide vt stqfra, \\ 1497, D. E.

f '* Au remissio peccatorum sic tota fidelium, coram Deo, jiistifica-
. tio, ad vitam aeternam obtincn<lain.

1888.] Justification. 477

Christy and justificatioDy were subsequently very extensively
adopted. The following is a specimen of his language : *^ Al*
though the forgiveness of sins and the imputation of obedience
or of a perfect righteousness are united by an undivided con-
nection, cmd from the former the latter can be rightly inferred,
yety it ought not to be confounded with it." *

The concluding sentence of the treatise above referred to is
the following : ^^ And thus far we have labored to illustrate the
truth in relation to the forgiveness of sins. And we have proved,
that when understood without synecdoche, it is not the whole
of our justification before God ; but only a part of it, even abso-
lution from the punishment of eternal death due to our sins, for
the sake of the satisfaction of Christ. But understood by sy-
necdoche it embraces at the same time the imputation of right-
eousness to eternal life."f And on p. 541, when answering
objections, he says : " The fourth objection is that the Scrip-
tures put forgiveness of sins and justification for the same,
and defines the latter by the former, Rom. iv. But I answer,
that this is done by synecdoche : because the forgiveness of sins
is the prior member of justification, which embraces the impu-
tation of Christ's righteousness, by the grace of God united with
it by an indissoluble connection, although distinct in reality." %
Gomar, however, because he departed only thus far from the
received doctrine on these topics, was long regarded by many
strict Calvinists with distrust, and as an innovator.

Before we leave the present topic for the purpose of taking
up the subject of Faith,'we hope to be excused (or adverting to

*^Ac quamvis individuo nexu remissio peccatoriim, et iinputatio
obedientiae seu perfectae jiistitiae sint conjuncta: ideoque ex priori
atterum recte concludi possit : cum eo taihen confundi non debet"
Opp. I. dd. col. 2.

\ ^ Atque hactenuB de reroissione peccatorum, ad veritatis illustra-
tionem egimuB: eamque sine synecdoche accepuim, non esse lotam
coram Deo justificatioDem probavimus : sed tantum partem illius ;
nempe a poena mortis aeternae, peccatis nostris debitae propter
Cbristi satisfactionem absolutionem : per synecdochen vero acceptam,
etiam justitiae imputationem ad vitam aoternam simul complecti."

I ^ Quarto oljeciio est : Scripttira remissionem peccatorum, et jus-
tificationem, pro eodem ponit, et banc per illam definit, Rom. iv.
Respondetur, hoc fieri synecdochice : quia remissio peccatorum tet
prius justificationis membruro, quod ex gratia Dei, individuo nexn,
sibi coDJanQtam babet justitiae Cbristi uuputationem ; quamvis re
dietinctam."

478 VUws of the Early Reformers. [Ap&ii.

two or three things that have lately grown out of the discus-
sions on Justification in the American churches. We shall re-
fer to them as briefly as is possible.

1. The definition which has recently been given of the term
pardon is the very definition which the later reformers give of
justification, and yet it has been maintained, and still is by pro-
fessedly strong Calvinists, that pardon and justification are so
essentially different as to constitute a breaking point of com-
munion. See e. g. Polanus. He says : ^' Proprie loquendo

juatificatio peccaioris non est remissio ipsa peccatorunif sed ah*
solutio a condemnationeJ^ Wendeline, Cloppeifburg, etc. use
the same language in relation to it. Yet the definition of par-
don referred to, is actually^ a literal rendering into English of
their definition of justification : viz. " Pardon is a release from
obligation to suffer punishment.^' *

2. It has also been thought exceedingly erroneous to deny
that " the righteousness" of God our Saviour really and properly
becomes ours.f But the following is the unvaried language of
the reformers in relation to it : ^^ Nothing therefore is more
impious than to assert that the essential righteousness of the
Creator is the righteousness of creatures. For from thence it
would follow that we possessed the righteousness of God himr
self yea, the essence of Qody and that we are Oods.'^ This
passage is from Ursinus. |

3. But there are other instances of departure fix»m the views
of the Reformation, on the topic before us, which it is proper to
notice. Views have been maintained as Calvinistic, which are
a much more serious departure from the theology originally
pronounced Calvinistic, and the opposites of which agree sur-
prisingly with the venerable men whose testimony we have ad-
duced.

One of these views is, that innocence and righteousness are
not the same thing.^ We do not recollect, however, a single

* See Dr. Junkin's Vindication, p. 183.

f Mr. Barnes ^ denies that the righteousness becomes o%irs — this is
again plain and positive,^ Vindicalion, p. 133.

X " Nihil igitur magis est impiiim, quam dicere> essentialem justi-
tiam Creatoris esse justitiam creaturarum. Inde enim sequeretur, nos
habere ipsius Dei justitiara, imo Dei essentiam, et Deoa esse ! " Ex-
plic Col. ad QuaesL 64. p. 354.

§ ^ My third remark is, that in the very ' Defence,* be [Mr. Barnes]
gives evidence of the truth of the charge [in relation to justificatioD].

1838.] Justification. 479

writer among the primitive reformers, who did not strenuously
maintain the converse of this proposition. The reader, by re-
ferring to the preceding quotations, will perceive the justice of
this remark, at least to some extent. Abundance of other in-
stances could be easily produced, if necessary, from the divines
before Dr. Gomar, who, I believ.e, wrote his commentaries
about A. D. 1625, or later. We cannot conceal our surprise
that this doctrine has now been repudiated so unceremoniously,
especially since it met with no opposition from the Calvinistic
churches even so late as the time of the first President Edwards,
In his treatise on Original Sin, (Works, Vol. II. p- 411) writ-
ten against Dr. Taylor of Norwich, that illustrious divine re-
marks as follows : *^ In a moral agent, subject to moral obliga-
tions, it is the same thing' to be perfectly innocent as to be per"
fectly righteous. It must be the same, because there can be no
more any medium between sin and righteousness, or between
being right and being wrong in a moral sense, than there can be a
medium between straight and crooked in a natural sense." In
fact, this very illustration was employed by some of the older
Calvinisls. And yet those brethren who complain of this view
as heretical, profess to entertain on all topics in dispute the very
doctrine of the Reformation ; and they are very much alarmed
lest that doctrine should be subverted by those who, it now
appears, with the greatest strictness and accuracy maintain it.
4. The following strikes us as a much more alarming devia-
tion from the principles of primitive Calvinism, than any yet
referred to. The sentiment has been advanced, and has been,
like the preceding, very extensively endorsed, that Adam was
not created righteous. This has been openly and without con-
tradiction (as yet), conceded to Pelagians and Socinians, that
" Adam was not righteous J^ * And we regret to be compel-
led, by our impartiality as a historian, to say that this sentiment
is attempted to be justified by the same mode of reasoning re-
sorted to by Dr. Taylor of Noi'wich in maintenance of the
same principle. That this may be fully manifest to the reader,

The very concluding sentence proves it : Mn the very passages ad-
duced by the prosecutor on this charge, I have taught that God admits
the sinner to favor, and treats him as if he had not sinned, or were
righteous.' Here is a reiteration (says Dr. Junkin) of the very error
charged^ that not sinning and righteousness are the sam^ ihing.^ Vindi^
cotton, p. 135.

* See <' Vindication,'' p. 135.

480 Views of the Early Reformers. [April

we give the language referred to, and place in juxtaposition to
it that of Dr. Taylor.

2. The language cfDr. John Teafor,

" ^dam could not be originatty cre-
ated in righteousness and true boln
nesfl, because habits of holiness auir
not be created, unthout our knowledge,
concurrence, or consent ; for holiness,
in its natnre, implies the choice and
consent of a moral agent, toithout
which it cannot be holiness y\

1. The language of Dr. Junkin.

*^ Now innocence is f^edora from
guilt, — the state and condition of a
moral being who has not transgressed.
it is rather a negative than a positive
quality or condition. Adam, the
moment of his creation , was innocent.
Bighteousness imvUes positive quality,
activity in compliance with law ; and
if the law prescribed a course, and
proposed a reward, the compliance
must cover the whole courde, — the
obedience must be entire and posi-
tive, in order to its being entitled to
the reward. Adam had rectitude of
nature and was innocent, but he was
not righteous'^*

It was against this tenet that Edwards directed the powers
of his mighty mind. See Orig. Sin, Part II. Chap. I. Sect. 1.
Works, Vol. II. p. 406 — 417. Even John Wesley, in his
" Original Sin,'' and Richard Watson, in his " Theological
Institutes/' not only refute it, but speak of the principle with
the utmost abhorrence. These men, though Arminians, viewed
the principle as opposed not so much to any particular system^
as in direct contravention of the gospel itself.

The earlier history, also, of this sentiment, is sufficient to
•stamp it with suspicion in the minds of Calvinists. Just as it is
expressed in the foregoing quotations, it is almost the ipsissima
verba of the Polish Socinians, who flourished contemporaneously
with the Reformers. They were the most strenuous as well as
the ablest opponents of Calvinistic theology that its advocates
have ever had to contend with. In proof of the identity of their
language with that above quoted, we cite the Confession of
Faith approved by their churches, vlt is entitled Compe^idio'
lum Socinianismi. The title of Chapter II. is De statu prim
hominis ante lapsum, that is, Of man's primitive state before
the fall : and Section I. thus reads : " Our churches teach that
Adam was created truly good, and without sin, Gen. i. Ec-
rles. vii. Yet not with any original righteousness ; seeing that
this is perfectly voluntary, and not natural. It is what the

• "* Ftfujtcation," ut sup. f '^Original Sin,"

1888.] JuiHficatunu 481

man might have obtained by obedience if he had unshed it ^ yet
the thing itself he had not." *

The reader cannot but be forcibly impressed with the striking*
contrast between the preceding quotations and the pointed con-
demnation of both their sentiment and phraseology by the re-
formers. We will add only one brief specimen of the kind,
from the admirable Syntagma of one of the most celebrated of
the Calvinistic reformers. His words are : Damnamus ^Osian^
drum, qui primum hominem ex creatione justum, neque injus-
tum fuisse asseruit : that is, ^' We condemn Osiandery who as*
serts that the first man was neither righteous nor unrighteous
by creation:' J^ag. Tikni. Soc. 33. Thes. 44. p. 211.
Osiander's doctrines were expressly written against by Calvin,
Ursinus, and all their celebrated ordiodox contemporaries.

[The remaining two sections of this Article, viz. The Views
of the Reformers on Faith and the Active Obedience of Christy
are deferred for the want of room in the present No. of the Re-
pository. They have been prepared with much labor and
research, and contain a portion of dogmatic history, which b
well suited to exert a conrective influence in some parts of the
American churches at the present time. — Editor.]

* <^ Ecclesiae] Docent ilium [soil. Adamum] fuisse creatum a Deo
bonum quidem et absque vitiis. Gen. i. Eccl. vii. Non tamen cam
aliqua originali justitia: cum baec sit perfectio voluntaria, non natu-
ralis, quam homo poterat quidem si voluiaset, obediendo comparare
sed reipsi tamen- non babebat."

Vol. XI. No. 80. 61

489 Hebrew Lexieogrtgfhy. [A.pbil

ARTICLE VI.

Hebrew Lexicoobapht«

Hehrdisehes und dudddisches SchuhoSrterlmch Hher das aUe TetiO'
merU, mit Hinweisuos auf die Sprachlehren von GeseniuB und
Ewald, von J. H. R. biesenthal. BerUiij 1837. Natorffu. Comp.

A Complete Hebrew and English Critical and Pronouncing DiO'
tionary^ on a New and h^oved Plan^ containing all the words
in the Holy Bible [nc] , both Hebrew and Chaldee^ with the vow-

.. el points, prefixes and affixes, as they stand in the original text :
togiether with their derivation, literal and etsnnological meaning,
as it occurs in eyery pait of the Bible, and illustrated by numer^
ous citations from the Targums, Talmud and connate dialects.
By W. L. Roy,* Professor of Oriental Languages m New York.
New York, 1837. Collins, Keese & Co.

Btvtowtd bj Dr. I. NordMjatr, Prof, of OrienUl LtatM|« la tht DaivwaHy of tiM dtf

of New York.

It may with confidence be asserted, that in no respect have
the recent improvements in the science of philology been more
fruitful in practical results, than in the interesting and highly
important department of lexicog^phy. In former timed a lex-
icon was a mere magazine, in which the words of a language,
together with their respective meanings were collected with a
greater or less degree of care, but with no other system than an
alphabetical arrangement, and without qny attempt to seek out
the hidden bond of connection running through entire families
of words which is indicated both by their form and signification.
Much less did it occur to the minds of the early lexicographers,
to investigate either the mode in which words are formea from
others already in existence for the purpose of expressing nearly
related ideas, or that in which the often numerous and appar-
ently widely different meanings of a single term have grown out
of the unique idea which it was primarily intended to convey.
These investigations, which constitute the very soul of modem
lexicography, were then almost entirely overlooked ; latterly
however they have profitably exercised the powers of some of
the acutest and most philosophic minds ; and the result has
been, that lexicons continue more and more to assume the char>
acter of scientific productions.

1838.] Hebrew' Leaieography. 483

At the present day, tberefin^, no lexicographer caa justly
daim to have advanced the study of a language unless his work
both in its contents and general plan shtdl prove him to have
entered upon his task with comprehensive and philosophical
views of language in general, and with both the will and the
ability to execute it in accordance with those natural principles
which are disclosed by a profound study of the infinitely diver-
sified forms of human speech. The lexicographer must enter
upon his undertaking firmly impressed with the conviction that
a language is not a mere mass of unconnected phenomena, the
results of a blmd chance, but is the true and lively representa*
tive of the human soul ; and that, as the soul of man is in all
times and situations subject to much the same impressions, and
as its operations are regulated by never varying laws, the lan-
guages of all nations, which are the immediate results of its
movements, must bear throughout the stamp of uniformity.

The full development of this fundamental truth is owing to
the indefatigable researches of modem philologists, who have
not sufllered themselves to be deterred by the striking dififeren-
ces which the structure of individual languages presents, from
endeavoring to discover the internal principle by which each is
connected to one vast whole. The secret of their success is to
be found in the fact, that they carried their inquiries beyond the
mere outward form of language, and subjected to a rigid scruti-
ny its hidden sources. By this means they were enabled to
prove to demonstration, that phenomena both lexicographical
and grammatical of the most opposite character are frequently
the ^st evidences of the radical nature of the connection exist-
ing between all languages, and furthermore that the occurrence
of such apparent discrepancies might have been predicted firom
the very constitution of speech.

In granting the &culty of speech to be a necessary part of
the nature which man has received from the band of the Al-
mighty, we acknowledge in effect that, even should it never
become externally manifest in the shape of articulate sounds,
its virtual existence is rendered coeval with that of man by the
creation of the mental powers requisite for its production. This
internal speech or language of the soul usually obtains an exter-
nal existence through the medium of the organs of speech : yet
should this be prevented by the malformation or total want of
one or more of these organs, some other mode of communica*
tioD will be substituted, such as gesticulation, the touch, etc. ;

484 Hebrew Lexicography. [Apeil

thus showing that the productive energy of the soul constantly
remains, although deprived of the usual nK>de of exhibiting its
effects. ^ When, however, no such difficulty occurs, and the
organs are capable of freely seconding every impulse of the soul,
the lattei^ as soon as excited by the impressions made on it by the
external ^orld, manifests a disposition to exercise its powers in
the production of audible speech. As the operations of the
soul and the movements of the organs admit of indefinite mod-
ification, the articulate sounds which are their joint production
exhibit an almost endless variety, and this is still further m-
creased by the combination of the individual sounds into words.
Thus, although audible speech is in the main a faithful tran->
script of the sensations and reflections of the mind, the immense
variety in the external circumstances of nations*, as well as in
their mental development and cultivation, constitutes a fruitful
source of diversity in the very outset of the formation of lan-
guage— a diversity which is increased ad infinitum by the* re-
action of the external world immediately succeeding the embody-
ing of the language of the soul in words, ai)d which results in
the formation of dialects and sometimes of independent lan-
guages.

When a word has experienced the effects of all the influen-
ces brought to bear upon it during its gradual formation, it ob-
tains a place in the world of language together with its inbei^
ent idea, the two bearing to each other the mutual relation of
body and soul* The path thus laid open by the mind for the
communication of an idea is naturdly sought by it again on the
recurrence of the impi'ession, by which it was first excited to
action, and in tbb manner the primitive word obtains a perma-
nent existence. It, however, still remains subject to the influ-
ences both internal and external which affected its formation ;
and hence, although created to be the sole representative of a
single idea, it is liable to changes both in its material structure
and in its animating principle. Thusj essential alterations in
the form of a primitive may gradually be produced by the re-
peated change or suppression of one or more of its elements
arising from defective organization or imperfect recollection,
while the idea which the word is intended to convey retains its
original character without any modification whatever. When
such changes in form have reached a certain amount, a new di-
alect is the result. Changes in the signijicaiion of primitive
words may be pi-oduced by alterations in the physical or social

1838.] Hebrtw Lexieogrmhy. 485

positioD of individuals or nations, in consequence of which their
impressions assume a character differing more or less widely
from that which they originally bore. The most direct and
easy expedient, and consequently that most usually adopted,
for expressing the modified feelings to which a new condition of
things gives rise, is, not to undertake the construction of new
terms, but to employ those already in existence for the expres-
«on of such ideas as their original most nearly resembles : and
thus a word which was created to represent a single idea may
gradually become the exponent of many others standing to it in
various degrees of relation. From each of these secondary
meanings new ones may branch out, until at length the only
mode in which the connection between the primary meaning of
a word and its remotest applications can be rendered obvious, ^is
to trace out the path followed by the mind in deducing the lat-
ter from the former. It will not utfrequently be found that the
intermediate significations have fallen out of use ; but as without
these the exhibition of the powers and uses of a word must ever
remain incomplete, there hence arises the necessity for their
restoration as far as practicable ; and this may truly be said to
constitute one of the most difficult and delicate of all the ardu-
ous duties which the lexicographer is called upon to perform*

In order to accomplish this in a manner to satisfy himself and
benefit those who may adopt his work as a guide, if the lan-
guage of which be treats be already extinct, it is requisite that
he should render himself acquainted with all its most important
remains, as these are the most authentic sources of information
to which, he can possibly refer; but should it be still in use
and rich in the treasures of literature, the abundance of materiab
thus furnished will impose upon him the additional task of tracr
ing its history down from the remotest periods to which he can
have access, and of showing what words and what acceptations
of words have come into use and been again rejected in all the
different stages of its existence : for

** Ut silvae foliis proDOS mutantur in annos,
Prima cadunt, ita verborum vetus interit aetas.''

Again, as a language when it first attracts the lexicographer's
attention may have already arrived at that state in which the
meanings of a single word have often no visible interconnection
in consequence of the disappearance of the intermediate shades
of signification, and which the utmost familiarity with that lan-
guage alone will not suffice to restore, the lexicographer who

486 Hebrew Lessioography. [Apbii#

desires properly to perform this poitioD of his task must apply
himself to the attainment of suqh a .knowledge of its cognate
dialects as may enable him to consult them with facility ; and
when these fail in furnishing the information required, he must
have recourse to languages possessbg no other relation to the
subject of his labors than that which all the varieties of human
speech bear to one another in consequence of their community
of origin and design. The labors which the lexicographer is
thus called upon to perform may well be termed Herculean ;
vet he alone who has mastered the peculiarities of a variety of
languages, whose powers of observation have been sharpened
by .constant use, and who possesses a judgment capable of
weighing with scrupulous exactness the value of conflicting tes-
timonies, can perform the part of one in a manner to satis^ the
claims which will be made upon him by the present advanced
state of the science of phiiolOgy.

In. addition to what has now been stated, there remains an-
other difficulty for the lexicographer to overcome. We have
already seen that instead of constructing a new term for the
representation of a new idea, the same object is frequently ef>
fected in a readier manner by employing a word existing in the
language whose signification is nearly related to the idea for
which an exponent is desired. When however this new idea,
although bearing a radical affinity to one which has already at-
tained its expression, is so iar removed from it as to render the
above expedient insufficient for the purposes of perspicuity, an-
other step in derivation is taken, which consists in modifying
or altogether rejecting one or more of the elements of the origi-
nal word or in malang an addition to their number. In this
manner from a comparatively few primitives are produced a
multitude of new terms bearing a resemblance to their respec-
tive (Higinals both in form and signification. So that the lexi-
cographer, after having discovered and systematically arranged
the various shades of meaning assumed by each separate word,
has to select the primitive from a mass ot words b^sunng to one
another an obvious relation, and then to show the manner in
which the derivatives have been formed, and the means where-
by they are rendered capable of adequately representing those
modifications of the original idea which they are intended to
convey.*

* For a more complete development of the writer^ ideas on this
subject, 860 the preface to his Hebrew Grammar, pp. xi. et aeqq.

1838.] Hebrew Lexicography. 48T

We have already shown that the discovery of the primary
meaning of a word, and the tracing of the connection between
it and its sometimes numerous seconda^ significations, is fre-
quently rendered so difficult by the disappearance of those
which were intermediate, that the possession of the acutest rea-
soning powers aided by the most comprehensive views of lan-
guage will not invariably ensure success. This holds true, and
to a still greater extent, of the attempt to find out and exhibit
the connection between the various derivatives fiom a single
root — ^an attempt whose difficulty is sometimes rendered almost
insurmountable fiK>m the multiplicity of changes both* internal
and external, to Which words are subjected in the process of
derivation, and furthermore from the fact that the primitive
word itself frequently becomes lost, and thus leaves them with-
out any common point of reference. Here comparative phi-
lology comes to the aid of the lexicographer, by presenting him
tnHn the cognate languages, and sometunes from those which
are more remote, the roots and significations which have disap-
peared from that which forms the subject of his labors. Yet
the lexicographer must be careful in an especial degree to guard
against the error, so prevalent at the present day, of hunting
out far-fetched illustrations from foreign tongues, to the neglect
of those sources of information which each language presents in
greater or less abundance for the explanation of its own phe-
nomena.

The above are the principal points to which the lexicogra*
pher must direct his attention in the illustration of words sepa-
rately considered ; but as in actual speech they are placed to-
gether in every possible kitid of relation, it becomes necessary
likewise to state the various modifications of meanbg whicn
thence result, together with the manner in which they are pro-
duced.

Let us now briefly sum up the duties which the lexicogra-
pher of the present day is called upon to peribrm. First he
must collect all the shades of signification pertaining to each in-
dividual word, arranging them in the order in which they arose,
and explaining on philological grounds the mode in which one
has proceeded from the other. In addition to this historical
developement of particular words, he must pobt out the primi-
tive of each group or family of words, showing in what manner
its derivatives were formed from it, and by what means they are
enabled to convey their respective meanings as modifications of

488 Hebrew Lexic^aphy. [Apbil

the original idea. Finally, be must indicate the yariations of
meaning to. which a word is liable when construed with otbets,
and point out the mode in which these variations are produced*
Should the lexicographer have fully met these requisitions,
whose fulfilment the advanced state of philological science so
absolutely demands, he may rest under the conviction of having
completed his undertaking, and answered all reasonable expec-
tations. And should he, without failing in any of these essen-
tials, proceed still fiirther, and exhibit the wonderful connection
existiDg between languages that have heretofore been regarded
as containing little or nothing in common, he will communicate
to his reader both instruction and delight, while to himself may
be applied the words of Horace :

"Omne tuUt punctum qui miscuit utile dulci.''

Having now given in outline the objects whose attainment
the lexicographer should propose to himself, and having enu-
merated the excellencies which at present so happily character-
ize the lexicons of the classical apd of many modem tongues,
we will now turn to our principal subject, the lexicography of
the Hebrew, and endeavor to show in bow far the existing lexi-
cons of this language come up to the requirements of the age.
And it may well form a subject of self-congratulation to every
lover of this venerable tongue, which for twenty-three centu-
ries has existed only in books, and the scantiness of whose re-
mains so much enhances the difficulties inevitably attending the
acquisition of a dead language, that its lexicography now stands
upon a footing equal if not superior to that of the Xtatin or the
Greek itself.

For this pleasing state of things we are mainly indebted to
the critical mind, the vast erudition, and the unwearied exerticMis
of Wilhelm Gesenius, who, having applied himself from hb ear-
liest youth with uninterrupted assiduity to the pursuit of Ori-
ental learning in all its branches, and being surrounded by bis
situation with ^^ every implement and means of art,'' has placed
himself foremost in the ranks of Hebrew lexicographers, and,
by the perspicuity of his writings, the depth and accuracy of
his researches, and a felbitous use of the materials so abundantly
furnished him by his predecessors, Kimchi, Buxtorf, Simoois,
Winer, fmd others, has raised this department of Oriental phi-
lology, which he has made so peculiarly his own, to the nigh
pitch of excellence it now exhibits.

1888.] Hebrew Lexicography^ 489

Notwithstanding the high tone of commendation we have
here employed in reference to Gesenius, and which we feel is
scarcely adequate to express those feelings of generous admi-
ration which the literary character of this distinguished scholar
is calculated to excite in every mind capable of appreciating
real merit, we do not mean to assert that he has absolutely left
DO room for further improvement. On the contrary, we are of
opinion that the etymological comparisons which he has insti-
tuted between the Hebrew and other languages, especially
those of the Indo-European stock, although exhibiting a fund
of ingenuity and learning, are susceptible of being extended
much further, and that many families of words which he has
attributed to two or three distinct stems might with propriety be
reiinited and arranged under a single primitive. It is not how-
ever our intention to enter at present into the history of Hebrew
lexicography, or to point out precisely how far and in what re-
spects Gesenius lias been enabled to improve upon the labors
of his predecessors, or in what his own may be regarded as de-
ficient ; since his work has been rendered accessible to all by
means of the accurate translation of Professor Robinson reviewed
in the twenty-fourth No. of this joomai. We therefore proceed
at once to a consideration of the respective merits of the two
^orks whose titles are placed at the head of this article, and
which, having but recently appeared, have not yet, it may be
presumed, become known to the public in general. This wd
will do with all candor and impartiality, bearing in mind the
celebrated saying of Pythagoras :

Both of these works we have examined with some care.
The former, written in German and published in Germany, is
called a << School Dictionary ;" accordingly we exp^ted to find
it defective in some particulars^ and containing few or no essen-
tial improvements on the larger works that had preceded it.
The latter, written in English and published in Amerk^, bears
the imposing title of ^' A Complete Critical and Pronouncing
Dictionary on a New and Improved Plan ;" leading us to an-
ticipate that in it the deficiencies of former lexicons would be at
least in some degree supplied. The result, however, as is not
unfrequently the case when judgments are based upon mere ex-
ternals, has proved entirely the reverse of our expectations.

On proceeding with our examination, we found the School

Vol. XL No. 30 62

490 Hebrew Lexicography. [AvBiL

Dictionary to be a work according completely in its general
features with the latest results of philology, and executed with
admirable accuracy in its details, while on every page its author
exhibits a perfect familiarity with every department of Hebrew
literature both biblical and rabbinical, a knowledge of the kind-
red dialects as uncommon as it is desirable, and that inquiring
and philosophical turn of mind the want of which no extent of
mere learning can supply. All these advantages have com-
bined to bestow on M. Biesenthal's work a character that will
enable it to bear a favorable comparison with the much admired
lexicon of Gesenius itself. In fine, this work so unpretending
in it& appearance, while well calculated to become the tyro's
guide through the intricacies of the language, is also capaUe of
communicating much that is new and interesting to the critical
scholar, and may justly be regarded as a most important addi-
tion to the treasures of Hebrew lexicography.

The Complete Critical and Pronouncing Dictionary appears
on the contrary to have been undertaken on no settled principle
whatever, while its entire execution betrays a degree of careless-
ness unpardonable in a work of the kind, and, what is of sliU
greater consequence, an almost total ignorance, not only of the
Shemitish languages in general, but even of the first principles of
Hebrew grammar. In short the book, instead of being k
desirable acquisition to Oriental philology, will prove, if not
Cast at once into it^ merited obscurity, a reproach to the
literary character of the country in which it was produced.

The expression of unqualified disapprobation is painfiil in thie
extreme ; and Che reviewer v^*ould here state once for all, that
nothing but a sense of duty io the public, combined with the
urgent solicitations of some of the most zealous promoters of
sound learning, could have induced him to take upon himself
the invidious task of placing before the world in its true colors
80 audacious a piece of charlatanism. He will now proceed to
a more particular description of the principal features of M.
Biesenthal's work ; after which he will adduce some examples
in support of his assertions, and compare with them the coires-
pooding portions of the Dictionary ot Mr. Roy.

The chief object which the author of the School Dictionary
had in view, was to .furnish the students in the gymnasia of
Germany with a manual containing the sum of all that is valoa-
ble in the latest discoveries in Hebrew lexicography withool
detailing the steps by which they have been arrived at, and

18S8«] Hebrew Leaicography. 491

which should thus hold a middle rat^k between a mere vocabu*
lary and the elaborate production of Gesenius, for whose use
the beginner is not yet prepared. Were this the whole extent
of M. Biesenthal's labors, he would deserve the thanks of all
lovers of Oriental literature for removing from the hands of the
student those skeleton dictionaries which can afford him no real
insight into the formation of the language, and at the same time
relieving him from the necessity of perusing the entire history of
a word in all its ramifications before he can arrive at the mean-
ing which fcMins the object of his search. The author of the
School Dictionary, however, has done more than this. Uniting
as he does a profound knowledge of his subject to a penetrating
mind, he has frequently been enabled to bring together roots
with their inherent ideas which Gesenius and his predecessors
had regarded as totally unconnected, (see for example the
words nifh and '^srn below.) He has also succeeded in a num-
ber of cases in discovering the primary signification of a word
within the limits of the Hebrew itself, where others have thought
it necessary to have recourse to the Syriac or Arabic, and in
thence deducing the secondary meanings in a manner so natural
and perspicuous as at once to delight the critical reader and af-
ford a grateful assistance to the student's recollection (see nbti
below.) In order that his work may afford to the learner not
^et familiar with the details of the grammar every assistance.
Its author has given at the head of each article all the parts of
imperfect verbs which occur in the Bible, the construct state of
nouns singular and plural, and the form assumed by these latter
on the reception of suffixes (see below the verbs TT!bn,^2rt,
tv^n , etc. and the nouns lljri and "lajti .) He has likewise been
careful to note in every instance the position of the accent, and
has constantly pointed out with iar greater minuteness than any
of his predecessors, Gesenius not excepted — ^the number of
times and the places in which uncommon forms occur, with
copious references to the smaller Hebrew grammars of Gesenius
and Ewald and to the Chaldee grammar of Winer. Another
dbtinguisbing excellence of the work consists in the scrupulous
accuracy employed in indicating the various shades of meaning
presented by verbs according to the particles with which they
are construed ; a particular in which Hebrew lexicography is
already so much indebted to Gesenius (see nbn, Tt^'n, etc. be-
low.) In the definition of words, in addition to the published
worKs of the most eminent Jewish lexicographers and commen*

492 Hebrew Lexicography. [Apeii:i

tators and the accumulated labors of ChristiaD scholars from
Buxtorf to Gesenius, the author has consulted a valuable manu-
script lexicon of Menahhem ben S'ruk, hitherto unedited, which
is preserved in the royal library at Berlin. We will now

E resent the reader with the means of forming a judgment for
imself by making a few extracts with accompanying remarks
from the body of M. Biesenthal's work.

The words I^Ti duroHon of Ufe^ worlds and n!;n moU^ are de-
rived by Simonis and after him by Gresenius from two separate roots,

III . y

Arab. vXJl^ ^ 2<^i ^ endtare^ and Syr. pUx» to dig ; and thus we

lose the analogy of the words "ilrtj and D5i:>, the latter of whu^h,
according to Gesenius, is from the root tl\T : thus Db^ to concealj
from which dH:' the hidden^ and hence the distant^ long lasting^
as tune, the world. This discrepancy, however, is avoided by BiL
Biesenthal, who derives from the obsolete Hebrew root nb^T to hide
anjDay^ conceal^ preserved in Babbinic, both n:rh the hidden^ remote^
hence <tme, the toorld (like tibis'), and nl;n a moU^ i. e. one hidden
in the earth. The correctness of the latter view is advocated not
only by the superior simplicity of deducing both words from a sin-
gle indigenous root, but also by the analogy thus shown to exist in
the formation of the two synonymous terms n^n and dM^. The

same analogy is exhibited by the Arabic Oof <uid OOl^ age^ eter-

m^y, from the equivalent roots ^x>f and sJO^^ to endure. With
these might be united the Hebrew iSfij to he losty to perish^ termed

by Golius and Frey tag the converse of OoT • f^^ ^ i^^^ ^f being
hidden or lost may be regarded in two opposite points of view,
either of becoming utterly lost, perishing, as the Heb. ISN , or of

losing itself iathe extent of its duration, as the Arab. OoT.

In page 234, col. 1, of the Dictionary of Mr. Roy, we read as
foUows: ** "iljn A weasel^ or smaU^ creeping animal, m. s. Lev. 11:

2d, |\m '^ (in this word there are three mistakes : the first letter
Hbeth is a medial instead of an initial, the vowel accornpanying the
word should be Petocho (^ not Sekopho ("), and this should be

placed not on the first radical but on the second, thus |J\m ). y la

1888.] * Hebrew Lexicography. 499

Syr. to creep, or steal upon a person softly^ imperc^ibly.^ (We
^ have no hesitation in affirming all diat part of the statement which
follows the word "or" to he a gratuitous addition of the author's).
Hence nbtl " (here are two mistakes : both n and b should be
pointed with (- ), thus n!jh as in Ps. 17: 14. 89: 6 ; the first (-^ ).is
changed into (^ ) only in those cases where the word receives a
pause-accent) " the worlds or time^ which passes away unnoticed,
as a dream when one awaketh." So that "i!;t^ " the ioorldy time^
is derived from i^h '^ a weasel or creeping ammai^'^ because the-
world creeps away I The Rabbinic derivation of this word is so-
much on a par with that of Mr. Roy, that we cannot resist the temp-
tation of presenting it for the reader's further edification. There
was, say they, a council called of the princes of the world, to con-
sult on the best method of administration. ' The ruler of the sea
complained that he had not subjects enough. He was accordingly
allowed to seek some from the earth, on condition of providing them
with food. Thereupon he cast all the land animals into the sea,
with the command that they should there propagate their species.
And hence the sajring, that every creature of the land is to be found
also in the sea, although some have been made to assume the forms
of monsters. But when it came to the weasel's turn, she standing
on the shore said to the prince of the sea, " Why must I throw my-
self ioto the sea again ? do you not perceive," pointmg to her re-
flection in the water, " that I am already there ?" The prince, sat-
isfied with this,-dismissed the weasel. Hence say the Talmudist^
every land animal is to be found in the sea, except the weasel wha
escaped by her cunning. On this account the earth is called 'il^h ^
as the weasel (n^b^n) alone* remains peculiar to it! (Buxt Lex.
Chald. Talm. et Rab. col. 756).

We entirely concur in the opinion of M. Biesenthal, that the
meaning of the next root rkti \a tohe weak^ sick ; and accordingly

reject the'far-fetched comparison of Gesenius with the Arabic fXr^

dtdcis et stutois fuit^ amamt^ from the primary meaning to rub^ to
polish : this he appears to have made with the view of illustrating
the Pihel rv*f] which he explains to stroke as the face or beard, and
hence tofaUer I We will extract the entire article from the School

494 Hebrew Lexicography. [Afeil

DictionlLTy, as a fair specimen of the philosophical acmnen and
clearness of arrangement which reign throughout the work.

** hbh inf. niin fut. apoc. ?n»n and in^i 1. to be weak, feint,
powerless. 2. to be sick T*^?n-nfiJ nbh to be diseased in the feet.
^3N nanN nbnn I am sick of love, nti n n^n a sore evil. S- to
be afflicted, disturbed, with oi about any thing. Niph* 1 pen,
•^rT'b^iJ 3 pers. siina part fem. nini , rth3 1. to become weak,
exhausted, powerless. !rtb^l3 Sis^ a wound difficult to heal. 2. to
be troubled, disturbed, with bl? about any thing. Am. 6: 6. Pi^hd
iiVn inf. niin imp. brj pi. l^rj fut(?) 1. to make sick. Ps. 77: 11.

2. to impose sickness upon one, with 2i Deut 29: 21. 3. to weaken
= soften something ; hence 'bo "^aD n^tr to soften one's counte-
nance (anger), comp. &*<3S n'^t^Dh Is. 53: 3. Ezek. 27 : 35^ and
t3^:D «to3 : ^'» "^30 n^U to soften Jehovah's face (anger), to
seek his grace. Ps. 46: 13 ; B? '^y^9 iVh*; ^•»3jj the rich of the
people shall soften thy countenance. Pu^Jud. vr\^ pass^ to be
weakened. Is. 14: 10. Hiph. '^J^hrj (Syr. form for n^^n) 1 peip.
^n^hn 1. to aggravate, as a wound. 2. to contract a disorder =s
make one's self sick. Hos. 1:5 : on the day of our king t'^yp ^b)[Tn
V.V^, nJorj the princes make themsehes sick from the heat of imne.
Others : the princes empty the skins of vrine. v. nnii (nsn ?)
Vulg. coepervntfurere a vino, according to the vowels nart • • • ^inti .

3. to be afflicted. Hoph. '^q'^^hn to be wounded. JSithp, inf.
ni^nri, imp. ihnn fut apoc. in pause itin^.i 1. to become sick.

2. simulative : to feign one's self sick. p. 138, 9, 10. 139, 16.
§ 370, 1) 373, 1. 2. 392 /?."

Turn we now to Mr. Roy's exposition of the same verb. ".Sib*!
1. He vmsfaint^ toeak^ exhausted^ etc. f 2. in painj or great distress ;

3. was grieved^ t^icted^ persecuted'''* (the reader will observe that
the meanings of the different species are jumbled togedier without
distinction and almost without order) ; ^^ 4. Ae supplicated^ asked for
mercy'*'* (we must charitably suppose that the connection between
this and the previous meanings is so perfectly self-evident to the au*
thor that he insiders any explanation unnecessary). Under the
head ^^ 3. m. s. pret K." we have ^^ 1 Sam. 22 : 6," where the word
occurs only in the participial form. In 2 Chron. 16: 1, which n
referred to as containing the future, the word does not appear in any

1888.] Hebrew Lexicography^ 49&

shape. In Jer. 12: 18, referred to for the Pi^el, we iiad only the
Niph'hal sii^nj. Next we have ** Piail'* (why repeated ?), " DeuL
39: 22"' (this' should he 29: 21), and further down, '' Hiph. 1 E. 22:
84^* (the word is here in Hoph'bal). Proceeding to the next line,
we find '* As a n. m. s. '•bh " (in this word are two typographical
errors: n should he pointed with (^), and b with (.), thus "^^h as
in Deut. 28: 61). Among the affixes to this verbal noun we are
presented with " n-her ** (" misfortunes never come «ngly," and ac-
cordingly here also are two mistakes : the vowel preceding n is (.,}
not (. ), and rr should contain a Mappik, thus n..) ; and this is foU
lowed by the enigmatical expression ^^ f.' s. const.,^' whose meaning
IS probably best known to the author. We have next **'^nVn Mf
infirmity y weakness^ f. s. Ps. 77: 11, for *inhbn , n 3 Bad. drop«
because of affl ^ compens. by dag." (in diis passage are four mis-
statements : fiist^ ni Vn iis not a derivative noun, but is the regular
inf. constr. Pi'hel of the nb verb nb^t ; secondly, the author imme-
diately contradicts himself by asserting that ^niVn '^ ^^ ^T\h\Yl
widi the third radial dropped on account of the affix '^ , whence it
appears that he now re^urds it as the pret. Pi%el with the afibrma-
tive •♦rj of the first pers. sing, which however would be W^gh not
"^nhbh : but in reality the word, as we have already observed, is the
infin. constr. with the suffix % of die first person ; consequently
n is not a suffix, but the hardened form of the third radical !
thirdly, the affi>rmative of the first peis. sing, pret of rrb verbs is "^n
n>t^; fourthly, as to the compensation of the third radical by
Daghesh in the second — ^fbr this is the only letter in the word bear-
ing this point — we would merely suggest that this is die characterise
tic of the Pi'hel species). " Hence, He declared it to be my 491-^
firmity^'' etc. (the word here rendered " he declared" is ittfit] Ps. 77:
11, the first pers. sing, fut with 1 conv.) Let the reader compare
this heterogeneous mass of absurdities with the masterly exposition
of M. Biesenthal, and draw his own conclusions.

Another of the many instances in which we think the author of
the School 'Dictionary to have happily reiinited the parts of a root
which Gesenius had separated is to be found in the two words "I3ttl
court and n'^^n grass ; the former of these is derived by Gesenius

^ ^ ^
firom the Arabic jo^^ to enclose^ surround^ and the latter from

496 Hebreuf Lexicography. [Apxil

I

/ / /

^^ to he green^ to flourish (viruit). Both words are referred by

M. Biesenthal to a single obsolete Hebrew root "nSKn bearing the
fianoe meaning with its cognates y^h = n^Ep == yszp^ , viz. to dividef
cut off, hence *ii^t} grau^ that which is cut down, and "nxTj Jrant
courts that which is cut off,, separated. We could wish that he had
proceeded a little further, and had noticed the connection between
grass and cottrt—e. place separated from the public ground by an

enclosure and hence producing grass ; which would have united the

/ * f I t f

two Arabic roots i^^-s^ to hedge about and iA«V. to he green, W©

will here give the article on '*)!2ti, as a favorable specimen of the
author^s mode of treating the nouns.

** nxn com., constr. nsn , with suff. i"^sm ; pi. trnSh , with suff.
•»nsn,and fem. ninxrt, constr. m'"^xh,with suff. "^ninsti 1.
court-yard, n^n**:©?} *^^^ the inner (priests') court of the temple.
2. hamlet, village ; used also of ^e moveable tent-villages of the
nomads. Is. 42: 11. It is used in composition to form many names
of place9, viz. (a) ^'jK-nssn a place on the border of the tribe
of Judah. Num. 34: 4. (h\ noio^rt andn^p»0 'ti (Horse<court) in the
tribe of Simeon. Josh. 19 : 5. 1 Chron. 4 : 31. (c) ^i^"^? 'li and
ir? '^ (Fountain-court) on the borders of northern Palestine. Num.
84: 9. {d) b^l-i? 'rt (Fox-court) in the tribe of Simeon. Neh. 11:
27. (e) li^'^nti 'h (Middle-court) on die border of Hauran. Ezek.
47: 16. (/) plur. ni'nsgn a camping-place of the Israelites. Num.
11:35."

On turning to the " Complete Dictionary," we find " 1^2?n grass^
leeks^ young grain" (!), One of the three references ^ven is " Is.
15: 16 ;" this chapter has biit nine verses, and the word appears in
the sixth. The word "n^h the reader will seek for in vain, but in
lieu thereof he is presented with '^ "nxh " (that this cannot be laid
to the printer^s charge, is shown by the annexed pronunciation ^ cha-
tzar ;" of this another specimen occurs a little further down, where
we have " n jfl-nsn cha-tzar-mo-weth" for n)» ma*weth). " A
courts or open phce^ set apart for public business." ^^ Pa. 104: 4.'*
{here the word does not occur).

The attention paid by M. Biesenthal to the development of the
significations of verbs as affected by the variolas particles with which
Ibey are construed will be seen in the following article on rv^fx .

1888.] Hebrew Leoeicogrctphy. 497

•* fnti fiit nnn J apoc. nh^ 1. to bum, used only of anger ; with
qN anger, or elliplically (§ 673) as ft. 18: 8 : ib rrjn Ac homed
(es entbramite ihm) sell, vnth anger^ 'bo ''S^sa Sinn one homed in
the eyes = as though his eyes glowed vnth rage ; with 2i against
one, usually with i; of the person and 5?5 of the object, less often
with -ifij. Niph!3 pi. nhj Job 1: 6. Part pi. D^-jn} Ls. 41: 11,
to be angry, with a with one. Hiph, rrnn^ fut. apoc. *nn\T 1. to
let or cause anger to bum. Job 19: 11. 2. to be ardent, zealous.
KpA. fut 2 pers. STjnnn Part, n'^trnq to enrage one's self, to con-
tend, with nfi) with one. Jer. 12: 5. ^: 15. HUhp. fut apoc. nhnn
to enrage, irritate one's self. Ps. 37: 1.''

Ob this word the " Critical Dictionary'' has as follows : " rf^h
1. He was irritaiedy etc. ; 2. fretful^ etc. ; 3. xealausy etc. Neh. 3:
20," (by what mle of preference is the third signification, which is
^t of the Hiph. species, favored with a reference which is refused
to the two first ?) ^* 3. m. s. Pret K. reg." (this is an error, as ac«
cording to the common phraseology adopted by Mr. Boy the verhs
rrb are irregular). "^ F. Exod. 32 : 1," (it occurs in the elevenik
verse of this chapter, but not in the first,) ^^ 12" (the only word
from the root nnn which appears in this verse is, not the future of
the verb, but the noun ]T*in).

The ingenious suggestbn of M. Biesenthal with regard to the ob-
scure word O'jlTT «m, is well worthy of notice. This word he sup-
poses to have arisen by transposition from nno = nnj]to me, aa
the sun, and cites in support of his opinion the proper noun t^zif^
Onh or nnO n:7:n Judg. 2: 9. Josh. 19: 50. 24: 30, and the words
n*i7^. D*i^T Job 9: 7, which he regards as an instance of paronoma-
sia. The opinion of Gesenius, however, who considers the primi-
tive idea to be that of dryness^ heat^ and the root D*^^ an instance
of the change of n into D for nnh , is by no means destitute of pro-
bability ; the commutation of the letters r and s being of frequent
and universal occurrence, e. g. Germ, tear, eiseny hase^ Eng. toof,
irony hare.

Turning to this root in the '^ Dictionary on* a New and Improved
Plan," we meet with the following : " Onh , in Arab. Uua^" (this

word is even more than commonly unfortunate : it contains an ini-
tial instead of a medial Ee, a medial instead of an initial Shin* and
Voi^ XI. No. 30. 63

496 Hebrew Lexicography. [Apbxl

a final Elif instead of nothing at all ; the word \Ji ^ can only be

5 c^ 5 ^ ^

the accusative of the noun of action (w&-ah o' (J*^/-^ » ^® ^^'

bal root of which is lyjJ^ )• ** To ontmote, enZiven, ««ir tip^ he cu>

iive^ lively^ vigilani*^ (as neither Grolius, Castell, nor Freytag has heep

/ / /
ahle to discern any one p£ these meanings in the word lyj^ » V6 cune

under the necessity of awarding to Mr. Roy the entire credit of their
invention). " As a n. m. s. onn*' (n should have (..), as in Job 9:
7, which is changed into (.) />nly when accompanied by a pause-
accent).

The few extracts we have made from the letter n will sufRce we
think to justify the opinions we have expressed concerning the mer-
its of the School Dictionary. At the same time it were much to be
desired, that its author had carried out more fully his idea of reiini-
ting when possible those roots which previous lexicographers have
divided without sufficient reason. Thus the root ^vr , which Gese-
nius has separated into two parts, the first signifying to he foolish^
the second to desire^ to attempt to gOy might we think eamly be shown

to bear a close relation to the Arabic \u tojlee^ to hasteny whence

jU fifety foremost ; from which is naturally derived the idea of

acting with haste or inconsiderateness, and hence foolishly. The
hastening or pushing of one^s self forward, so characteristic of youth»
is closely connected and especially by the grave Orientals with the
idea of folly, while the deliberateness of movement peculiar to age
is united in our minds with the notion of wisdom. This union of
haste and folly is expressed in the forcible German proverbs^ ^' Der
Narr ist immer vom an," " Mit dem Narren macht man Bahn.'*
We could also have wished that M. Biesenthal had devoted some
share of his s^ttention to the comparison of the Hebrew with other
languages ; for, although his work is designed principally to be a
student^s manual, we agree with the opinion expressed by Gesenius
in the preface to his smaller Grammar, that the exhibition of the re-
lations which a language bears to others is an excellent means of
keeping alive an mterest in the young philologist for the objects of
his puxBuit — an opinion, be it said, which, applies with greater pro-

1838.] Hebrew Lexicography. 499

.priety to lexicography than to grammar. The author could easily
have materially increased the interest and utility of his woric, by giv*
mg at the end of each article the results of those comparisons in
which Gesenius may be considered to have attained complete suc-
cess. This, however, his desire for originality in all likelihood for-
bade.

We will now devote a short space to a consideration of the gener-
al character of the Complete Dictionary, although we fear that the
reader like ourselves is already heartily disgusted with the subject ;
for, as the book is a native production, it behooves us once for all to
make its real character completely known. The first point to which
the attention is paturally directed on taking into consideration the
character of a work is its general plan ; but as we candidly confess
our inabiliiy to discover in the present instance aught deserving the
name, we will briefly state what appears to have been the mode of
its fabrication. The grand idea then of the author it appears was
this : to copy from the Concordance all the forms of each word that
occur in the Bible, and arrange them in the order of the alphabet,
whether beginning with a radical or a servile letter. But this bril-
liant undertaking has not been crowned with success, as will suffi-
ciently appear from the numerous deficiencies disclosed by a com-
parison of the first full page of the Dictionary with the lexicon of
Gesenius, which we have made in compliance with the author^s own
proposal. In the first place, we find, agreeably to the alphabetical
arrangement, the word PnsK 2 m. s. pret. Pi'hel of n^K , but why
18 no mention made of the first pers. "^nnafif Jer. 15: 7 ? again, why
have we not nhatj Num. 17: 20, add with n par. 2 Sam. 17: 1, and
also ntanfi} Ps. 41 : 7. 55 : 24, etc. ? It is true that these are not
made separate articles by Gesenius, but they should be so to carry
out the alphabetical principle of Mr. "Rqy ; the following indepen-
dent words, however, occur in the Bible and consequently in Gese-
nius, although in the ^ Complete Dictionary^ they wiU be sought for
in vam; '\n» Esth. 9: 5, ivr^ti^ 1 Sam. 9: 1, qDet^3M Exod.6:24,
yaw Exod.'9: 31. Jer. 2: 14, fj^^w; Num. 1 :'ll. 2: 22, »Tatj
Gen! 25: 4, rrafit 1 Sam. 8: 2, Nirra« Jer. 10: 1. Words with ^
conversive lemd conjunctive are of constant occurrence in inmost ev-
ery letter of the alphabet The author states as one of the ^' supe-
rior advantages^ of his Dictionary, that it will supply the place of a

500 Hebrew Lexwgrjophy. • [Apbil

concordance. He does not however appear to haye the remotoBt
idea of the real nature of such a work, the peculiar de«gn of which
is, not to give all the forms in which words occur together with their
prefixes and suffixes, but to state in what places and in what connec-
tions they are found.

And even were the scheme of giving every word in the order of
the alphabet completely carried into effect, its ridiculous absurdity
will at once become apparent, when we reflect that were a verb
conjugated through all the modes, tenses, and persons of all species,
it would be necessaiy to insert it in not less than one hundred places,
not including the prefixed particles. It is true, that no one verb is
thus extensively employed ; but we have examined the verb *1J^D in
the Dictionary, and find that it occurs no less than tioen/jf-ntne times,
while Gesenius in his lexicon has given it but a ^gle place. The
noun ^'^'^ is also made to form seoen distinct articles. We are thus
enabled to perceive whence the author derives the boast in his mod-
est preface of having given ^* several thousand more words than
Hebrew lexicons in general.'^

That the author is not familiar with even the characters of the
Arabic and Syriac, is obvious from the fiict that out of every twenty
words from either of those languages not three are correct As we
have already exhibited some specimens of this, we will here confine
our remarks to the Arabic and Syriac columns in the taUe of ^ Ori-
ental Alphabets'^ placed at the beginning. As only one form of
each letter is given in mutilated alphabets of this sort, which by the
way are intended not for use but for show, initials only should bo
employed; yet we meet with four medials C • ^^ ^^ ^\

in the Arabic column, and one ( ^ ) in the Syiiac. In arranging

the Arabic letters opposite the Hebrew, the author has made j = ^

and ^^ = T , the reverse of the truth. The initial f^ (named Caf )

is properly placed opposite the Heb. d ; while its medial form ^^

(named Kaf) is made to correspond to ^, the author evidently
taking it for a difieient letter of the alphabet ! The letter below th^
is Elif (t) instead of Lam (J). The Arabic ^ (Sin) is placed

opposite to *is , and ^ (Shin) to i!;. In the Syriac column we have
a final Yud («-) instead of an initial Nun (j)*

1838.] Hebrew Lexicogrcg^hy* 501

We wHl DOW discuss, as briefly as possible, the claims of the bpok
to ^ correctness and completeness in its definitions ;'' and that neither
himself or others may accuse or suspect us of doing him the slightest
injustice, we \nll speak only of the first verb (iai{) which occurs,
and of the first word (i^*!^) to which the author requests our particu-
lar attenti<m in this respect

^^ nSK 1. Heperishedy was lost^ utterly destroyed ; 2. vfent astray^
departed from God ;'^ (this last signification is completely errone-
ous: we have indeed nSM n^ a lost sheep^ but the word IM is
never applied to man in the metaphorical sense here attributed to it ;)
^ 3. became vainy en^ty^ desolate, destitute*^ (the product of the au-
thor^s brain). Although synonymous and erroneous interpretationa
here as elsewhere have lent their aid to give an appearance of full-
ness to the definitions, the real uses even of the simple or Kal spe^
cies are not all given, while those of Pi^hel and Hoph'hal are utterly
neglected. ^ We will proceed at once to the other parts of the article,
dwelling on them as slightly as possible. ^^ 3. m. s. Pret K. irreg.
m Num. 17: 12.'' (not there) " Ps. 9: 67.'' (for 9: 6, 7 ; in the first
of the two verses it occurs in the Pi'hel with the transitive agnifica-
tioa to destroy), '^ Deut 32: 28.'' (the word is here not a preterite
but a participle) " Hiph, Num. 24: 9." (not there) " aflT. n She "
(it should be n ^ ). " Arab, o^ To perisky die. Kimkf." (tho
amount of ignorance and presumption compressed within this small
«qrace is truly astonishing : the middle letter of the Arabic root
, should be an initial not a final Be, thus Oof ; the meaning attributed
to it is the direct reverse of the true one, which is to last long, to
endure^ and in support of it we are referred to Kitnki ! The fact is
Kimchi never wrote an Arabic lexicon, and die Sepher Hashshora-

shim makes no mention of the word Oof) " I'J'^^^'^Q Targ. Onk.
on Deut 33: 18." (incorrect). ** As a n. f. s. JTjaftJ A lost person^*
(untrue : the word is applied to things only) ^^ destruction, perdiiiony
the invisiMe staU, the bottomless pit " (all false). '' Exod. 22: 9.'^
(not there : it should be 22: 8.) " Deut 22: 5." (not there : it should
be 22: 8.) " Prov. 22: 20." (not in the chapter). " ^i Chald." (false :
the termination ]i is purely Hebrew, and occurs in a multitude of
nouns, e. g. Jinasa , ]in3T , pm , etc. ; again, as the author sup-
poses it to be Chaldee, why does he refer for it to '' Job 28: 22." Is
Job written in Chaldee !)

509 Hdfrew Lexicography* {Apbil

u ^.jn y We pass over the string of 6yDon]nEnes in No. 1, and
proceed to ^^2. he t€ttighty puni^iedy Jud. 8: 16.'' (the word is here
in Hiph'hil, and* signifies merely to cause to know^ to teach) ; '' 3* re-
vealedy made knoum^ Gen. 45: 1." (the word is here in the HiUip. with
the reflexive meaning he made himself known) ; ^ 4. was discovered^
1 Sam. 22: 6.^' (the word is in Niph. the passive of the simple form
Kal) ; '' 6. Ae directed, pointed out, Exod. 18: 20.'' (it is here in
Hiph. and with the same meanmg as in No. 2.) ^7. constituted, etc«
1 Sam. 21: 2.'' (not there) ; " 9. regarded, etc. 1 Sam. 2: 1. 2: la''
(not to be found in either place) ; ^^ 10. was conoinced, etc. ; 11. A^
produced, etc. ; 12. distinguished,^^ etc. (in all the passages referred
to in support of these senses, the verb retains its primary meaning,
to know; except in ^^peut 1: 29,'' where it does not appear!);
^ 13. acknowledged, etc. ; U.feared,^^ etc. (the same may be ob-
served of the significations here given ; for die last we are referred
to 1 Sam. 2: 12, whe/e it means simply to know scil. the Lord, as
correcdy rendered in the English version) ^^ 3. m. s. Pret. K. irreg.
^D Ps, 1: 6." (we here find a participle, but no preterite) " Prov.
"27: 23." (sijuture and an infinitive, but no preterite) ** Dan. 6: 10."
(not there : besides the whole chapter is in Chaldee 1) ** F. 1 Sam.
110: 30." (we find here ^n^'i^ which as the merest tyro might per-
ceive, is a preterite and not a future) ** Deut 8: 6." (^Piaj'^^ !) " Job
20: 20." (yn^ the root itself! I), " aff. n , 3 f. s. R 2. m. s." (why
not also rj 2. V. s. Jer. 50: 24. ?) " ^3 1. c. p." (theDaghesh should
be erased) ^* t3ri 2. m. p." (a Daghesh should be inserted in n ;
why have we not also ^Ij Gen. 31: 6. ?) " n^ Acr" (it should be n).
^ Niph. 1 Sam. 22: 6. F. v. 31." (the chapter has but twenly-tkree
verses). " PiaU. 1 Sam. 21: 2." (not there). « Whence «na To
imagine, inoent, devise, think " (the only point of resemblance be-
tween this and the root :p*^'^ to know, that we can discover, is that
both contain a 1 ! ]

The^e are the results of an impartial examination of the two
books whose titles stand at the head of these pages. We think
we have fully redeemed our prombe of showing a warrant for
the opinions of their respective merits stated 4n the outset : viz*
that the School Dictionary may be regarded as a valuable ac-
cession to the stores of Hebrew lexicography, while the Com-
plete Hebrew and English Dictionary is wholly unworthy of

1688.] CriHeal Noiieet. 503

the claims which it has set up to respect and patronage. L^
the reader call to mind, that in speaking of this latter perform^
ance (it is unworthy the name of a worJc)^ we have confined
ourselves to the parts corresponding to the few examples ad*
duced from a single letter of the alphabet in speaking of the
School Dictionary, together, with the first verb, and the first
word for which its author challenges our especial admiration ;
and he will find no difficulty in believing us when we affirm^
that to enumerate all the misstatements and blunders in this
volume of 700 pages, would require a book of twice its size, to
say nothing of the general mode of execution, which betrays a
total want of conception of the very nature of lexicography.
We owe it to ourselves to state, that neither would we nave
spent our time or taxed the patience of the reader in wading
through such a rudis indigestaque moles of error and absurdity,
did we not feel that the interests of literature and the reputa-
tion of the country imperatively demanded it at our hands.

ARTICLE VIL

Critical' Notices,

1. — An Inquiry respecting the Sdf'detenmmng Power of the WUl;
or Contingent Volition. By Jeremiah Day^ President of YdU
College. , New Haven : Herrick & Noyes. 1838. pp. 200.

The question of the self-determining power of the will is inti-
mately connected with many of the theological discussions of the
present day. ^' Yet there are reasons for believing that it. is not^
m all points of view^ generally and clearly understood.'^ There is
certainly great confusion of views often manifested in the prevailing
popular debates and discussions embracing this question. We hail,
therefore, with pleasure, the publication of this volume by President
Day. We have only had time to bestow upon it a cursory examina-
tion. For this however, we feel richly rewarded, and have no hesi-
tatipn in pronouncing the work every way worthy of the character of
its respected author ; whose habits of thinking, as well as his con*
ciiiatory spirit, peculiarly qualify him for a satisfactory and useful
discussion of so difficult a subject, and concerning which there has, of
late, been so much excitement among theologians of different schools.

504 . Criiicdl Notices. [Ap&il

This Tolume has so xecently come to hand, that we haye neither
time nor room to give a full review of it in the present No. of the
Repository. This it is our purpose to do in a future No. After a
few pa^es of introductory ol^iervations, the running titles of the seve-
ral sections of the hook are the following, viz. powers of the ndndy
self-determinations infiuence ofmotives^ liberty and necessity ^ ability
and inability s consciousness and ajccountaMtUy^ common sense^ me*
ehamcal andjthysical agency ^ moral government of Gody activity and
dependence J Jiualism and pantheism^ testimony of Scripture, It is for
the sake of securing a due appreciation of the last named source of
evidence, on a subject so momentous, that our author has felt him-
self called upon to settle the several principles involved in the pre-
ceding topics of discussion. On this point his own remarks aie as
follows.

" Here we are met 'with an assumption which precludes a refer-
ence to the decision of Scripture. It is claimed, that reason and
consciousness, and common sense, have already decided the point ;
and that God cannot contradict, in his word, what he has distmctly
made known to us by the faculties which he himself has implanted
in the soul. Whatever passages, therefore, which seem to tavor a
particular doctrine, may be found in the Scriptures ; they are to be
so inteqpreted, as not to signify any thing which reason pronounces
to be absurd. We are called upon, then, to inquire, whether the
position, that nothing but the will itself has any influence in deter-
mining what its acts shall be, is so intuitively or demonstrably eer"
toin, as to preclude all possibility of finding the contrary declared in
the word of God. So long as this position is adhered to, it is in vain
to think of appealing to the authonty of the Scriptures, on the ques-
tion respecting a self-determining power of the will. Tliey will, of
course, be so explained as to express a meaning in conformity with
the principles assumed. This is my apology for making an appli-
cation of dry metaphysics to a subject so nearly connected with one
of the roost important departments of scriptural theology.'' (p. 13.)
Again he remarks, " I do not propose to establish certam theological
points, by metaphysical reasoning, and then call in the aid of reve-
lation merely to confirm the results of philosophical discussion. I
would only aim at removing some of the objections which may lie
in the way of a ready admission of the testimony of Scripture on the
su^ct under consideration.'' (p. 14.)

Dry metaphysics, however, when applied with the caution and
discrimination of Pies. Day, become attractive and entertaining, as
well as instructive, to minds which are sufficiently disciplined to fol-
low' a continuous train of reasoning to its results. They are dry and
uninteresting only to such as lack the patience of investigation and
the power of discrimination which are necessary to conduct the
mind to satisfactory conclusions on such subjects. Such only, we
venture to predict, will complain of *^ Day on the Will," as tedkvos

188&.] Day on the ffiU. 505

•

and uninstructive. For though it is admitted that metaphysical rea-
soDings are insufficient to discover to us the foundations of religious
truth, without the aid of divine revelation, yet positions have been
assumed claiming the support of metaphysics, from which those who
maintain them can only be dislodged by the weapons of their own
warfare. It is with reference to such positions, sustained by false
reasoning, that our author has entered the lists as a met£iphysician.
His opposing positions appear to us to have been taken with great
precision and accuracy, and his reasonings to be conclusive.

President Edwards, in his Treatise on uie Will, gave a masterly
exposition of the principal forms in which the docthne of a self-de-
termining power may be met and refuted. ^^ But for some reason
or other,^' as our author remarks, ^^ his view of contingent self-deter-
mination appears to have attracted less attention of late, than that
particular mode of statement which he resolveai into an infinite series
of volitions. The doctrine of his opponents was this. That the free
acts of the will are not determined to be as they are, by any influence
from without the will itself. This was considered by him as involving
the alternative, that every volition is determined either by a preceding
volition, or by nothing at all. The latter is contingent self-determina-
tion. This appeared to him so obviously absurd, as not to call for a
logical statement, expanded into the form of a regularly constructed
demonstration. To the other branch of the alternative, he has done
such ample justice, that the question concerning it may be considered
as definitively settled. This may be one reason why the advocates of
a self-determining power in the will, adhere so tenaciously to that
form of the doctrme which implies contingepce, as being the only
ground lefl, on which they can hope to mamtain their position.'^

It is to the refutation of those who, on this ground, have evaded
the conclusions of Pres. Edwards's reasoning, that Pres. Day has di-
rected the powers of his well disciplined mind ; and his success,
we think, is entirely triumphant. He has demonstrated that, " if
nothing from without the will of the agent can have any influence in
determining what bis volitions shall be, then it must be beyond the
power of the Father of our spirits to give direction to the acts of the
will, without interfering with the prerogative of accountable agency.
Omnipotence itself cannot work contradictions. When that inex*
plicable power, the human will, has once been set a going, it must,
according to the doctrine of some, be suffered to run on for ever,
throwing off its volitions by contingent efficiency, uncontrolled and
uncontrollable, by any thing from without itself.'^

One happy result that we anticipate from the publication of this
volume is, tnat it will lead theological combatants to see how much
of their differences arises from the use of ambiguous language. The
i^ecision of the author in his definitions of terms, and the candor and

Vol. XI. No. 30. 64

506 Critical Notices. [April

fairness with which he treats his opponents, are examples worthy of
imitation ; and his discussion of the topics embraced in this vdume,
we think, cannot fail to exert a correcting, an enlightening, and a
heaHng influence, wherever it shall be attentively read and candidly
weighed.

2. — The Sin against the Holy Ghost ^ explained agreeably to the
Holy Scriptures. By Lewis Mayer ^ D. D. Late Professor in
the Theol Sem. of the Germ. Ref, Church in the United States.
Baltimore : Lucas &, Beaver, 1838. pp. 42.

This is an Essay of uncommon merit, and furnishes interestmg
evidence that the learned author, having retired from his professor-
ship in the Theol. Sem. of the Germ. Ref. Church, is still turning his
biblical studies to an important practical account. A right under-
standing of the nature ana characteristics of the sin against the Holy
Ghost, IS one of the most difficult and perplexing points of practical
theology. It is a point, too, on which the unlearned and unstable
have wrested the Scriptures more than on most others. Dr. Mayer^s
discussion is wholly biblical^ and his views are presented with great
clearness and precision. He discriminates between the sin a^inst
the Holy Ghost, described Matt 12: 31, 32. Mark 3: 28--a0. Luke
12: 10, and another unpardonable sin of which mention is made in
the first epistle of John and in Heb. 6: 6 and 10: 26-*29, with which
the sin against the Holy Ghost has often been confounded. He dis-
sents from those interpreters who place the commission of this sin
only in defamatory words, and proves conclusively that it was not
committed by the scribes and pharisees, when they reviled Jesus,
saying "^ He hath Beelzebub, and by the prince of the devils casteth
he out devils." His position b, that ^^ The blasphemy against the
Holy Ghost was the malicious reoUing of the testimony which the
Holy Ghost hare to the divine mission of Jesus and the truth of
Christiamly^ in his ndraeulous operations in the churchy after ks
was came in Chrisfs steadJ*^ This sin he regards not as ^^ a single
transient act or deed of excessive enormity, but a permanent dispo-
sition of mind and manner of acting, which terminates only with the
end of life ; by which the person who so demeaned himself set at
naught all the evidence of the truth of Christiani^, even the testi-
mony of the Holy Spirit, with all the light and com&rt which accom-
panied it, and consequently shut himself out from faith and repent-
ance." It is unpardonable, ^ because it wholly excludes all faith in
Christ, and consequ^itly all repentance and conversion to God."

This view of the subject is not new. It is substantially that of
Whitby ; but it is more fully sustained in this Essay, by an ample
Induction of Scripture proof, than we have seen it elsewhere. We
rejoice, therefore, in its publication in a form in whioh it may be ex-
tensively read.

1888.] Sckmucker m the Reformatum. 507

3. — Disccurse in Commemoraliou of the Ghriotu Reformation of the
Sixteenth Century^ delivered "before the Evangelical Lutheran
Synod of West Pennsylvania. By 5. S, Schmucker^ D, D.
Professor of Theology in the TheoL Sem. Gettysburg^ Pa.
New York : Gould <k Newman, 1838. pp. 131. 12mo.

This Discounse was prepared by appobtment of the synod before
which it was delivereci, euid in compliance with a resolution of that
body recommendmg that a discourse on the Reformation be annually
delivered by each member of the synod before the people of his
charee, ana that one such discourse be annually delivered before the
synod. It is worthy of the form in which it is now given to the
public, in a neat and convenient volume, afid well sustains the repu-
tation of the author as a judicious and good writer.

After a brief statement of the ^' spiritual tyranny under which the
whole civilized world was groanine'^ at the commencement of the
Beformation, and '^ a few consideraUons to show that the period for this
event was wisely chosen by the Head of the Church,^ the discourse
announces and discusses the following as among the distinguishing
features of the Reformation : — ^I. It gave us free access to the uncor-
rupted fountain of truth and duty, God's holy word, as our only in-
fallible rule of faith and practice. — ^IL It has delivered the church
from a multitude of doctrinal and practical corruptions. — ^III. Has
^ven .us liberty of conscience and freedom from religious persecu-
tion.— ^IV. Has delivered the civil government of the countries which
embraced it from papal tyranny, and has given a new impulse to
civil liber^, which has been felt in every kingdom of Europe.^'

Under tne last head our author presents, and sustains by authentio
documents and history, the following established principles of popery^
which have led to her encroachments on civil hberty in other coun-
tries, and must also do so in our own country if she should be per-
mitted to prevail. — ^^ 1. The popes actually do claim, at this day,
jurisdiction over the highest civil governments in the world. — 2. Thejy
undertake to depose civil rulers, and to absolve.the people from their
allegiance to their own civil governments, even if they had formally
pledged that allegiance by an oath.-^3. Romish ecclesiastics, priests,
monks, and nuns, claim exemption from the civil jurisdiction of the
governments under which they live. — 4. Their priests, etc. are under
such oaths to the pope and his kingdom, as render them necessarily
unfaithful to the civil liberties of any country.''

The positions of Dr. S. are bold and uncompromisins ; but they
are well supported, and his argument throughout is conducted in a
spirit of candor and kindness, which, unhappily, has not sufficiently
characteiized some recent American pubhcationa on the Catholic
controversy. We are glad to see that the subject of the Reformation,
and of the blessiagB, both civil and religious, which have resulted

508 Critical Notices. [April

from that great event, has hecotne so prominent an object of atten-
tion in the Lutheran church. Their example is worthy the emula-
tion of other denominations of Christians.

4. — A New Tribute to the Memory of James Brainerd Taylor, —
New York : John S. Taylor, 1838. pp. 440.

The subject of this tribute was one of the most interesting and
useful young men who have adorned the church of Christ in any age
or country. He was called to his reward in a better world in the
spring of 1829, and in the spring time of his life and promise. He
died at the age of twenty-eight, having, but a few months previous,
completed his education's a candidate for the christian ministry,
and received license to preach the gospel. But the hand of God
was upon him. The malady which terminated his life, arrested him
at the very commencement of his labors in the office which he had
long sought with the most lively and glowing hope of usefulness to
his fellow men. Yet it cannot be said of him, that he obtained the
prize without running the race. During the whole progress of his
preparation for the higher sphere of usefulness and duty to which
he aspired, he was intent upon doing good in all the circles in which
he moved. His life, though brief and principally expended in pre-
paration for a class of labors which he was never permitted to per-
form, was nevertheless most usefully employed, and the memory of
it remains, as a burning and a shining light, to extend and perpetu-
* ate its influences upon the cause to which it was solenmly and re-
ligiously devoted.

The " Memoir of James Brainerd Taylor" commenced by the
late Dr. Rice of Virginia and completed by his brother, Rev. B. H.
Rice, D. D. of Princeton, N. J., has been several years before the
public, has passed through several editions and been extensively
read. The design of the compilers of the Memoir was to exhibit his
religious character and exampU to candidates for the christian ifitn-
istry^ as models for their imitation. Of its adaptation to such a de-
sign too much cannot be said in its praise. It is worthy of the es-
timation in which it is held, and of the extensive circulation it has
acquired. The " New Tribute*^ to his memory embraces a larger
design, and exhibits many " additional breathings" of the pure spirit
of young Taylor, recorded by his own pen, and more minute de-
scriptions illustrative of his character, — ^" and the particulars that en-
tered into combination to form that character ; together with a more
graphic account of the last scenes of his brief and holy and happy
life." The author is anonymous ; but his intimate acquaintance with
the subject of his sketches, and the ardor with which he enters into
the spirit of it, betray the kindness and affeetion of a brother, and
give additional interest to the work. It contains also materials which
were not adapted to the specific design of the ^^ Memoir," and is en-

1838.] JHctbrnary of the Anglo- Saxcn. 509

riched by extracts from an additional Number of Mr. Taylor^s Diary,
(which has been found,) of greater interest than any before publish-
ed. We commend it to our readers, as well worthy the patronage
which we trust it will receive.

5. — Wanderings and Adventures in the Interior of South Africa.
By Andrew Steedman, In two Volumes, London : 1835.
pp. 330, 358.

These volumes contain a great variety of information acquired by
the author in the course of a ten years^ residence at Cape Town.
During that time he traversed most of the interior of Southern Afri-
ca, principally, as he informs us, *^ for amusement and information,'*
and obtained an extensive collection of its productions in natural
history. Among these were several new and undescribed ani»
mals. The incidents and adventures which occurred under his
own observation were carefully preserved in a journal and compose
the thread of his narrative, which is, at once, credible, entertaining
' and instructive. His accounts of the benefits resulting from the la-
bors of the Wesleyan missionaries among the Cafires are gratifying
and encouraging to the friends of missions, and the moral influence
of the work, no less than the variety and value of its information, is
such as to commend it to a favorable reception. Several of the
scenes of the narrative are illustrated by lithographic and wood en-
gravings, beautifully executed, and the whole is accompanied with a
map of southern Afiica, supplying the most recent geographical in*
formation of that country. We are happy to learn that these vol-
umes have been recently introduced into the American market, and
may be purchased of J. S. Taylor of New York, and other book-
sellers.

6. — A Dictionary of the Anglo-Saxon Language^ containing the
Accentuaiion^the Grammaiical Infeciions^ihe irregular u}ord8
referred to their themes^ the parallel terms from the other
Gothic languages^ the meaning of the Angh'Saxan in English
and Latin^ and copious English and Latin Indexes^ serving
as a Dictionary of English and Anglo-Saxon^ as well as of
Latin and English, with a long Preface^ a Map of Languages ^
and the essentials of the Grammcar, By the Rev. X Bosworthy
B, P., B. D., F. K. S., etc. etc. London : 1837. pp. 900.

In our Number for October, 1837, we gave a brief statement of
existing efforts in England to promote the study of the Anglo-Saxon
language. Among the names to which we alluded was that of Mr.
Bosworth. This gentleman, now British chaplain at Rotterdam, has
long been known as an indefatigable student. He published many

510 Criiical Notices. [Apbil

years ago ^ Elements of the Angio^Saxon QnaaBor*^ and subae*
quently an Abridgement of the same. He is also the author of the
**" Origm of the Dutch, with a sketch of their Language and Litera-
ture, ^^ The Origin of the Danish, and an Abstract of Scandinavian
literature,'^ and ^* The Origin of the Germanic and Scandinayian
Languages and Nations.'^ The woiic whose title is prefixed to this
notice occupied the author's attention more than seven years, four
of which it was in the press. The dictionary is beautifully printed
with three parallel columns on a pa^. With the view of illustrating
^tie Anglo-Saxon, nearly all the radical words, and a few important
compounds are followed by the parallel terms from the cognate dia-
lects. To show more clearly the analogy of cognate languages, Mr.
B. has attempted to arrange the paraltel terms in the most natural
order. The Low German is generally placed first, because it is
now spoken by the people who occupy the territory formerly peo-
pled hj the ancestors of the Anglo-Saxons. The Dutch and Frie-
sic words follow, because they are of the same low German branch.
Then succeed the German, the Alemannic, the Francic, the Moeso-
Gothic, Danish, Swedish, Norwegian, Icelandic, and Old Danish or
Norse. The derivation immediately follows the synonymes, thou^
on this debateable ground constant care has been taken to refram
from doin^ too little raUier than to do too much. Then the siffnifi*
cation is given in Endish, while the principal significations in Latin
are added. The racucal meaning is placed mst, then its various
aignificatioDs are numbered and arranged in that order which ap-
peared most consonant with the association of ideas ; each meaning,
where practicable, is confirmed by a reference to the authors who
most use the word. Next follow the idiomatical expressicMis. By
the English and Latin Indexes of about 150 pages, the Saxon of the
greater part of the English and Latin terms may be found, the de-
rivation and original meaning of most English words ascertained,
and a comparison instituted with their radicu cognates in the other
Gothic languages. The Roman character has been employed in
printing the Anglo-Saxon words with the exception of two peculiar
letters answering to the English th in thing ana in thin. As the au-
thors are always quoted, the age and purit^r of a word can be seen
at once. Accents are now adopted, as they were evidently used by
the Anslo-Saxons, to distinguish long from short vowels. They are
placed, nowever, only on the word and its variations standing at the
nead of each article. Prefixed to the dictionary is an elaborate and
very learned preface of more than 200 pages. The points discuss-
ed are the connection of the Japhetic languages with the Sanscrit,
the Grerman and Scandinavian ; the Anglo-Saxons ; the Anglo-Sax-
on dialects ; the ancient and modern Frienc compared with the An-
glo-Saxon by the Bev. J. H. Halbertsma, a native Friesian ; the OM
Saxons ; the Netherlands or Holland ; the Goths and the Moeso-

1888.] Dictionary of the Anglo-Saxon. fill

Gothic; the AlemamiiorSuabiaDs; the Francs; the High German
with its ▼arioua dialects ; Scandinavia literature, including a sketch
of the languages of Iceland, Denmark, Norway and Sweden ; the
affinity of Germanic languages ; etymology, with the manner of
forming words, and an outline of the German system, and the Es*
sentials of Anglo-Saxon Grammar with an outline of the systems of
professors RaSn and Grimm. The author remarks with great can-
dor, that ^' the Essentials are ffiven as the result of a long and close
investigation of the language m the preparation of the Anglo-Saxon
Dictionary, and a continuea appeal to the grammar of a lamented
friend, the late professor Rask, and to the Teamed Deutsche Gram'
matik of Prof. Grimm of Gottingen. It will be seen, that, as infor-
mation has increased, there has been a ^dual approximation, in
gammatical forms and accents, to the views of Profs. Bask and
rimm.'*

We are truly glad in the prospect of a good Anglo-Saxon Die*
tionary . We have, in two or three of our large libraries, solitary cop*
lesof Hickes and of Lye, — ^ponderous and dusty tomes whose exter-
nal form ia bu emblem of what reigns within. We can never hope for
a revival of Anglo-Saxon studies in this pountry without better ele-
mentary books than we have had. ' The volume of Dr. Bosworth
will supply the want in lexicography. A small volume published in
1834, by Mr. Benjamin Thorpe, the translator of Bask^s Anglo-Saxon
Grammar, will serve as an excellent Chrestomathy. It is entitled
^Analecta Anglo-Saxonica : a selection in prose and verse from
Anglo-Saxon authors of various ases ; with a Glossary, designed
chiefly as a first book for students. Rask's Grammar, the Ana-
lecta, and the Dictionary (without the preface) , may be obtained in
this country for about fourteen doUars. It is no honor to us that
the main root of our language remains so little explored by us.
Each of our colleges should nave a professor of Anglo-Saxon, or
perhaps of English with special reference to its noblest source. One
institution, the University of Virginia, has set a good example in
establishing an Anglo-Saxon professorship. We are no anii-Latin'
ists or anti-OaUicisiSt yet we long for the time when old Beowulf,
and ^Ifric, and Alfred shall be duly honored ; when we shall culti-
vate the fresh, generous, and robust speech, from whose stores
Sbakspeare derived his immortal words. Such studies will open to
us unexpected fountains of joy and profit We shall get a new in-
sight into German, Dutch, Danish, Icelandic. We shall teel a warmer
sympathy for all the brave nations of the north, once bone of our
hone and flesh of our flesh. More than all, we shall have what
ctonot otherwise be gained, a fundamental acquaintance with our
existing vernacular tongue.

5i2 Critical Notices. [April

7. — Letters fr<m the West Indies. Andover and New Yoik :

Gould ds Newman, 1838.

We bad the privilege of perusing this work in manuscript. Its
author, Mr. S. Hovey, formerly a tutor in Yale College, and for a
number of years subsequently professor of mathematics and natural
philosophy in Williams and Amherst colleges, resided for a consid-
erable portion of the years 1835 — 6 — 1 in the West Indies. His
observations are, however, confined to the Danish island St Croix,
and to the British islands Antigua, Barbadoes, and Jamaica. His
main object is, to present a general development of the condition
of slavery in the West Indies before emancipation took place ; a
brief description of the two systems which have been adopted at
different islands, viz. immediate emancipation, and what has been
termed the apprenticeship system ; together with the difficulties, and
the degrees of success, which have severally attended them in prac-
tice. Antigua, Barbadoes, and Jamaica are among the largest
islands which the English possess, and they have ever maintained a
high rank in the West Indies. Two of them are seats of episcopal
sees, and each has a government of its own. Antigua is one of the
two which proclaimed immediate emancipation, and is a favorable
place for a trial of that form of abolition. At Barbadoes, the ap-
prenticeship system was adopted, and is generally allowed to have
succeeded better than anywhere else. The same system was also
adopted in Jamaica ; but it has met there with the greatest opposi-
tion and discouragement ; so that at Barbadoes and Jamaica we find
the two extremes in the working of this plan. It is universally ad-
mitted that these three islands afford collectively a fair representa-
tion of the two systems, both in theory and practice ; and that con-
clusions, justly drawn from these examples, may be considered of
universal application in the West Indies.

The author, in our opinion, shows an unusual degree of candor,
^udpnent, discriminating observation, and industry, in the details
which he has spread out before us in these pages. The spirit in
which the Letters are written is eminently kind and conciliatory.
All classes of our countrymen, we presume, whatever may be their
opinions of slavery in the United States, will be glad to possess them-
«elves of the facts and views presented in the work of Professor
Hovey. If slavery is ever to be abolished in this country, as it un-
doubtedly will be, and in some of the States at no distanf day, such
information as is here embodied will be of great value, exhibiting the
results of one of the most important experiments ever undertaken by
man.

8.— The Works of Charles Lamb. 2vols. New York: Harpers, 188a

We have read these volumes with mingled feelings of pleasure
and sadness. Lamb is one of the few original characters who has

1838.] Wayland on RespanMiKiy. . 613

appeared in modern times. His intimate friends shrink from the
task of delineating what mocks the powers of the most delicate and
discriminating pencil. Beneath all his gaiety, notwithstandinff all
his lightness of heart, and his inveterate punning propensities, there
was a tender melancholy, a longing for something higher and better,
a dread of futurity, an instinctive grasp on present and surrounding
objects, which invests his course with the deepest interest After
our best endeavors, we feel that we do not understand him fully ;
and where we do, we find it very difficult to embody our conceptions
in words. Lamb was not a great poeU But as an essayist, terse,

gunsent, witty, ironical, fuU-souled, playful, and old English, we
ardly know his equal. His language is aAer the ancient, glorious
models of Thomas Browne, and Fuller and Burton.

Sorrowful is it, that such a gentle spirit should have been given to
bis cups, should have so degraded himself beneath the beasts which
perish. The apology which Mr. Talfourd tries to set up for this
habit in his friend is lame and awkward enough. We must also
protest with equal decision against some of the language employed
by Lamb, his correspondents, and his biographer. Profane epi-
thets ought to be excluded from all decent books. Trifling woids
on the most awful subjects, no man has a right to employ. Witti-
cisms in respect to the existence and agency of the great enemy of
God and man are equally abhorrent to taste and religious feeling.
What if it would spoil a good joke or a taking story, if LamVs wri-
tings were divested of these obnoxious epithets ? * We are not to tam-
per with morality and religion for the sake of a pun. With all that
IS contained in these volumes relative to the theatre we have, of
course, no sympathy. A selection of Lamb's Letters and Essays
miffht be made to which no friend of good order would object, and
which would display noble poweis of thought and of description.
As it is, the work is attractive, and we are not surprised at its popu-
larity.

9. — 2%e lAmUatvm of Human RespansihUity. By Francis Way^
land^ President of Brown University, Boston : Gould, Ken-
dall & Lincoln, 1838. pp. 188.

The subjects discussed in this volume are the nature of human
responsibility, individual responsibility, persecution on account of
religious opinions, propagation of truth, voluntary associations, eccle-
siastical associations, ana the slavery question. Human responsi-
bility is not concerned, according to Dr. Wayland, beyond the limit
of our ability, nor does it require a kind of ability which has not been
committed to us. Our responsibility is limited by the respect which
we owe to the rights of our' fellow men, and frequently W the inno-
cent obligations which we have previously contracted. We are not

Vol. XI. No. 30. 66

514 Critical Notices. [Aprii*

responsible for the perfonAance of an action, when it cannot be per*
formed without using our power for other purposes than those for
which it was committed to us. Our responsibility ceases, when a
particular good cannot be accomplished without the presentation of
wrong motives to another; and when the performance of one duty,
may be limited by the more urgent claims of another duty of the '
same character. The author then applies these principles to perse-
cution on account of opinions, to the propagation of truth, to volunta-
ry and ecclesiastical associations and to slavery. In respect to vol-
untary associations, he thinks that the following limitations should
be ol»erved. The object for which men should associate should be
capable of so exact and palpable definition, that it may be always
clearly distinguished from every other that might from time to time
be amalgamated with it The mode of operation should be accurate-
ly set forth. The object itself and the mode of promoting it should
be entirely innocent In the section on ecclesiasucal associations,
Dr. Wayland explains the principles on which christian churches are
formed, particularly those of the Independents, asserts that these lat-
ter are incapable of representation, and points out some dangers in-
to which they are liable to fall. The author remarks upon some of
the aspects of slaverv in the slave States, in the District of Colum-
bia, and in Texas, and uppn the duties and rights of the North and
South. We have not room in this place to examine any of the opin-
ions advanced by Dr. Wayland.

10. — The Works of WiMam Covoper, By Robert Southey. lb vols.
Foohcapy 8i?o. London : 1835 — ^7.

Tlie Works of William Cowper^ edited by the Rev. T. 5. Grim-
shawe, 12 vob. Foolscap^ 8vo. London : 1835—7.

Shortly after the death of Cowper, his Life and Correspondence
by Hayley appeared. Though extremely interesting as the work
unquestionably was, yet Hayley saw fit to suppress and mutilate
much of his materials. The poet's Memoir of Himself was brought
to light in 1816. The Private Correspondence of Cowper, with Mr-
Newton and others, was published by Cowper's relative. Dr. John
Johnson, in 1824. In 1825, a small volume,with the title of ^^ Poems,
the early Productions of W. Cowper, with Anecdotes of the Poet,
collected from Letters of Lady Hesketh,'' appeared. It contained
the relics which had been for many years in the possession of his
cousin Theodora Cowper. Subsequently was issued Mr. Thomas
Taylor's Life of Cowper. This, however, did not add much to the
original biomphy.

Instead of a complete edition of the works of Cowper, which has
been for a long time a desideratum, we have now two rival incom-
plete editions. Mr. Grimshawe, the biographer of Legh Richmood,

1838.] Jewish Scriptures and Antiquities. 515

is a oonnectioii of Dr. John Johnson, and liadthe exclusive privilege
of publishing unmutilated the Private Correspondence edited by that
geDtleman. On the other hand, Dr. Southey has collected from
many sources a variety of new documents and traditionary informa-
tion. Dr. Southev's Life of Cowper, which occupies the first two
volumes and nearly the whole of the third, we have just read. With
many excellencies it has one striking defebt. The bic^rapher in*
du]ges in long digressions on the characters of Lloyd, Thornton,
Colman, Churchill, and others, with whom Cowper had but an ex-
tremely slight connection. There are, also, other wecurisome and
altogether unnecessary interruptions. Such men as Colman had no
communion of soul with Cowper. Then why burden his narrative
with their story ? The engravings, pictures of scenery, etc. which
are numerous, are generally done with that skill and taste for which
the London artists are so renowned. Mr. Grimshawe^s edition is
also enriched with superb engravings. The picture of Cowper's
mother, in this edition, is almost worth the entire cost of the set.
The great controversy respecting the causes of Cowper's derange-
ment seems as far from being settled as ever. One class of biogra-
phers cmd critics throw their arrows at old Mr. Newton and through
him at the ^^ evangelical school ;" while their opponents seek to
vindicate Newton and his religion from having any thing to do with
the madness in question. In our opinion reli^on is whdly guiltless,
and Mr. Newton nearly so. Taking the evidence of some of the
letters which passed between Newton and Cowper, we cannot but
feel that the venerable pastor was not always judicious. His influ-
ence on the delicate sensibilities of the poet was generally soothing
and salutary ; but sometimes he required too much of the shrinking
feelings of his companion.

In his preface to the fifteenth volume. Dr. Southey informs us that
he is preparing to bring out three supplementary volumes, (which
will be sold separately), to contain the memoirs and correspondence
of Cowper's principal friends and relations, such as Lady Hesketh^
Lady Austin, the Unwins, etc.

11. — Academical Lectures on the Jewish Scriptures and Antiquities..

By John GarJiam Palfrey, D. D. Professor of Biblical LUC'

rature in the University of Cambridge. Vol. L The four last

Books of the Pentateuch. Boston : James Munroe & Co.

1838. 8vo. pp.511.

We have read but a small part of these Lectures. Our principal
object in this notice is to mention some of the subjects discussed.
The first lecture considers the antiquity and history of the Hebrew
language. Some remarks are also made on grammars and lexicons
and on the cosnate dialects. In the second lecture the author comes
to the conclusion that the several books of the Old Testament, like

516 Critical Notices. [ Apbil

thode of the New, are to be judged on their sevecal and independent
grounds of evidence ; and tnat the mere circumstance of being ex-
cluded from the canon, and stigmatized by the title of Apocryphal,
should not prevent other books from having their claims considered.
The third lecture is employed on the history of the text of the O. T., the
Samaritan Pentateuch, the Alexandrine-version, etc. The authenticity
of the books of Moses is discussed in the fourth. It is remarked, that
the external evidence, though not to be so confidently urged as it has
sometimes been, is in &vor of the commonly received opinion, while
the internal favorable evidence is of a very weighty kind and of a
large amount. The purpose of the Mosaic revelation is considered
in the following lecture ; various arguments, objections, and difficul-
ties are discussed. The subject of the sixth lecture is the miracles
of Moses performed in Egypt, and the exodus of the people from
that country. In the seventh lecture various topics come under re-
view. The manna and the quails are both alike considered as natu-
ral productions. The miracle consisted in the seasonable provision
of such quantities of them on this occasion. The constitution of the
Hebrew State, the Jewish magistracy in Egypt and in the wilderness,
and the giv'mg of the law at Sinai, are next remarked upon. In the
ninth lecture we have a discussion on the Sabbath. Dr. Palfrey re-
marks, that the manner of its celebration was simply cessation from
labor. He supposes that the Sabbath was a Jewish institution merely.
In relation to the text which occurs at the beginning of Genesis, he
remarks : ^^ When we have advanced to the reading of that book, I
shall be better understood when I say, that, supposing the latter half
of the second verse, and the third verse, to be genuine, it is by no
means clear that any institution whatever was here intended to be
spoken of by the writer." The passage in Exod. 20: 11, " For in six
days the Lord made" etc. and the parallel passase in I)euteronomy,
are not thought by Dr. Palfrey to be genuine. " His chief reason for
this persuasion is, that, supposing the genuineness of either, it presents
a fragment, di^ring in its tone and structure from all the rest of the
Decalogue, since the Decalogue, in every other case, studying the ut-
most brevity,* deals only in &ws and their sanctions, without exhibit-
ing the reasons on which they were founded ; a topic which seems for-
eign to its purpose.'^ The tenth lecture is on the priesthood, tabernacle,
and some events which occurred at Mount Sinai, subsequently to the
giving of the law. The three following lectures are on Leviticus —
uie laws, customs, usages, and events recorded in that book. In the
remaining seven lectures, the Mosaic history is pursued, through the
books of Numbers and Deuteronomy. " One who has seen reason,"

* This does not appear to be correct in regard to the second and the fiflh
eommandments. In the latter we hove the reason of the command icriveo in
the form of a promise : " That thy dayc may be long upon tJie land which
the Lord thy God giveth thee.'*

18380 Frof. Stowe's Report. 517

remarkB the author, *^ to conclude that the preceding books were the
work of Moses, will scarcely hesitate to refer this, [Deuteronomy]
with an equal degree of confidence, to the same orisin.'^ *^ The
former books are characterized by the comparatively dry manner of
an annalist, Deuteronomy by the more full and earnest style of oral
discourse.'^ Our limits compel us to stop with this hasty glance at
some of the topics handled in these Lectures. In respect to a part
of the discussions, it would not be altogether fair to pronounce an
opbion till the remaining volumes have appeared.

12. — Report of Elementary PMic Instrttetion in Europe^ made to
the thirty-sixth General Asiembly of the State of Ohio^ Dec,
19, 1837. By C. E. Stowe. Ck>lumbus : 1837. pp. 57.

This Report was made in compliance with a resolve of the legis-
lature of Ohio, requesting professor Stowe to collect, durins the
process of his contemplated tour in Europe, such facts and mfor-
mation as he might deem useful to the State, in relation to the vari-
ous systems of public instruction and education which have been
adopted in the several countries through which he might pass.
We are glad to see the spirit which is manifested by the legisla-
ture of Ohio in relation to this excellent Report. A large number
of copies were published and distributed, and five hundred dollars
given to the author for his pains. We learn that the Report has
been, or is about to be, published by the legislature of Pennsylvania.
As large extracts, or the entire document, have been published in
many of our newspapers, it is not necessary for us, if it were prac-
ticable, to copy from it in this place. After some animated intro-
ductory observations. Prof. Stowe gives an account of elementary
education in Russia. He then proceeds to full details of the Prussian
system, under the heads of internal arrangements, institutions for
reformation, course of instruction in the common schools, relimous
instruction and character of the system. Under the last head, he
shows that it has great completeness, developes every faculty of the
mind, is of an entirely practical character, and has a striking moral
and religious bearing. In order to introduce this system into our
country, as it may be done, and ought to be done substantially,
teachers must be wilful and must be trained to their business ; there
must be institutions in which teaching is made a systematic object of
attention ; teachers must be competently supported and devoted to
their business ; the children must be made comfortable in their
school ; they must be punctual, and attend the whole course ; they
must be given up implicitly to the discipline of the school ; and a
beginning must be made at certain points^ and the advance towards
completeness must be gradual.

518 Critical Notices. [Apru.

Id. — History of the Reign of Ferdinand and baheUa, ike Catholic,
By Wiuiam H. Prescott, In Svols. Bostoa: Ainericaa
Stationers^ Company, 1838.

Mr. Prescott is a lawyer of Boston, a graduate of Harvard, 1814,
and a son, we believe, of Judge Prescott of Groton. We have here-
tofore seen nothing from his pen except a Memoir of Charles Brock-
den Brown in Mr. Sparks^s Biography. The History of Ferdinand
and Isabella, by the unanimous suflrage of readers of all classes, is
destined to reach a very high rank in English literature. It was
commenced and prosecuted under extraordinary circumstances.
Soon after the author's arrangements were made, early in 1826, for
obtaining the necessary materials from Madrid, he was deprived of
the use of his eyes for all purposes of reading and writing, and had
no prospect of again recovering it He then made the ear do the
work of the eye. With the assistance of a reader uninitiated in any
language but his own, he worked his way through several venerable
Castalian quartos. He then procured the services of one more
competent to aid him in pursuing his historical inquiries. The pro-
cess was slow and irksome to both parties, till the ear was accom-
modated to foreign sounds and an antiquated and barbarous phrase-
ology. After persevering in this course for some years, his eyes,
by the blessing of Providence, recovered sufficient strength to allow
him to use them with tolerable freedom, in the prosecution of his la-
bors, and in the revision of all previously written. Mr. Prescott's
labors to dig up the original sources, and to explore paths where no
Spaniard's foot had trod, are worthy of all praise and of all imita-
tion. He had free access to the Ebeling and Warden collections
in the Harvard College library, and the very valuable private library
of Mr. George Ticknor, collected by the owner during a long resi-
dence in Spam and other parts of Europe. Mr. Rich of London, a
learned antiqucuy, rendered Mr. Prescott much assistance. Mr.
A. H. Everett, American minister in Spain, and his secretary of le-
gation, interested themselves to procure what might have been diffi-
cult of access without such official aids. Mr. P. thus obtained some
works not found in the general libraries, and many of which are not
cited by any European writer, at least out of Spain. He secured,
for instance, a complete collection of all the laws, ordinances, and
pragmdticasj published during the reign of Ferdinand. In addition,
a number of unpublished MSS. of that age, invaluable for illustration,
and probably little known even to Castalian scholars, were procured.

Investigations so patient, industry so iron-like, and, we may add,
morality so commendable and so uncommon in going to the foun-
tain-heads, will have their reward. The labor wul be appreciated
throughout the civilized world. Thanks will flow in to the author
from proud and jealous Europe. For us, Americans, the work will
have special claims. Isabella has been justly termed the mother of

1838.] AiUiquiiates Amtriamat* 519

Ameriea, Her reiffn is imeparably connected with the fortunes of
this new world. Those interested in the Catholic question, as many
are in this country, will find in these volumes much food for contem-
plation. They contain the best account of the Inquisition which has
appeared, derived mainly from the voluminous disclosures of Llorente.

14. — AtUiqvnlates Atnerkanae^ sive Scriptorei Septentrionales Rerum
Ante' Coluimlnanarum, in America, SanUing qfdei Nor dens
Oldshrifier in deholdte efterretninger om de gamle Nordhoers
opdagelsereiser iU America^ fra del lOde tU det I4de Aarhuu'^
drede. Edidit Societas Regia Antiquariorvm Septentrional
lium. Hafniae, 1837. 4to. pp. 479.

This great work, a solitary copy only of which we have seen, was
edited by Prof. C. C. Rafn of Copenhagen, and is brought out under
the patronage of the Royal Society of Danish Antiquanes. It gives
extracts from eighteen ancient authors principally Icelandic ; several
containing detailed accounts of the discovery, and all of them allu-
sions to it About one half of the volume consists of two narratives*
The first may be called the History of Eric, the first settler of Green*
land, and the second, which is the longer performance, is the His-
tory of Thorfinn the Hopeful, who conducted the most important
expedition to Yinland or Wineland, a name given to the country dis-
covered, from the abundance of grapes found by the adventurers.
Appended to these extracts and documents, is an account of certain
monuments of the ancient occupation of Greenland by the Scandi-
navians. There seems, on the whole, to be eood reason for believ-
ing that these reports of the discoveries of the Northmen are founded
on fact, and that the American continent was visited by them in the
eleventh century.

15. — Specimens of Foreign Standard Literature. Edited ly George
Ripley. Vols. I. and 11.^ containing PhUosophieal MiscelUg'
nies^from the French of Cousin^ Jouffroy^ and Benjamin Con*
slant. Boston : Hilliard, Gray & do. 1838. pp. 383, 376.

The publication, of which these two volumes form the commence-
ment, has special reference to the three leading divisions of Philoso-
phy, History and Theolo^ ; though its plan includes wiitings of a
popular character, selected from the most finished specimens of ele-
gant literature, and adapted to interest the great mass of intelligent
readers. The following works will compose a part of the series :
Menzel's History of German Literature ; Goethe^s Life, his Corres-
pondence with Schiller, 2^lter, etc., and his Conversations with Eck-
ermann ; Benjamin Constant on Religion, and on Roman Polythe-
ism ; De Wette^s Lectures on the I%ilosophy of Religion ; Select
Minor Poems of Groethe and Schiller ; Guizot^s History of Civiliza-

520 CriHeal Notices. [April

tioD ; Herder's Select Religioas Writing; Life of Jean Paul
ter ; Joufiroy's Moral Philosophy ; L3mc Poems from Koriier, No*
yalis, Uhland, etc. ; Schellin^ on the Philosophy of Art ; Selections
from LesBuig, etc. The series of volumes, ir it should be continued,
will be composed of the contributions of difierent translators, entire*
ly independent of each other. It will be devoted to the advocacy of
no exclusive opinions, and is designed to include works and authors
of the most opposite character, without favor or prejudice. We no-
tice among the writers from whom it is proposed to make transla*
tions, the names of Neander, Schleiermacher, Olshausen, and
Tweslen.

The first two volumes of these Miscellanies contain translations
from the miscellaneous, philosophical works of Victor Cousin, Theo-
dore Jouffiroy and Benjamin Ck)nstant Introductory and explanato-
ry notes are supplied by the translator. The extracts from Cousin
are upon the destiny of modem philosophy, eclecticism, the moral
law and liberty, the idea of cause and or the infinite, religion, mys-
ticism, stoicism, classification of philosophical questions and schools.
M. Cousin was bom at Paris, Nov. 28, 1792. In 1810 he entered
the Normal school, of which he became the principal af\er the revo-
lution of 1830. In 1815, he succeeded M. Boyer-Collard as pro-
fessor of philosophy in the faculty of literature in the university of
Paris. At the same time, he taught philosophy at the Normal school.
In 1817 and 1818 he visited Germany, and, in 1820, the north of
Italy. In 1822, the Normal school was suppressed. In 1824, M.
Cousin, while travelling in Germany, was seized through the influ-
ence of the Jesuits ana imprisoned for several months. The afiair,
however, terminated to his honor and to the shame of his enemies.
In 1827, he was reinstated in his office in the university of Ptuis.
From 1890 to 1835 he published four new volumes of the transla-
tion of Plato, a new edition of his own Philosophical Fragments, an
edition of the posthumous works of M. Maine de Biran, and a work
on the Metaphysics of Aristotle. His Reports on the state of Pub-
lic Instruction m Pmssia are well known in this. country. His latest
work, 1836, is on Public Instruction in Holland. In 1832, be was
made a peer of France.

M. Jouifroy is a pupil and friend of M. Cousin. The extracts
from his writings are on common sense, skepticism, history of phi-
losophy, faculties of the human soul, method of philosophical study,
eclecticism in morals, good and evil, how dogmas come to an end,
the Sorbonne and the philosophera, reflections on the philosophy of
history, the influence of Greece in the development of humanity, and
the present state of humanity.

The passages from Benjamin Constant's writings are, on the pix>-
cressive development of religious ideas, the human causes which
have contributed to the establishment of Christianity, and the perfec-

1688.] Liimwy mi MueO. BudUgtiM. 601

tibStyof the humaa rao& M. OonslaiitwasbomofFieiiehpaxeiits
at Lftusanne in Switzerland, in 1767. He expiied sbortljr after the
xeyolutkxii of July, 1890. He is not regarded as ranking in philoeo-
pfay with Cousin and Jouffroy. All three were, however, united in
opposition tQ the old French school of infidel philosophy, and as ar-
dent friends to freedom of thought and of expression.

ARTICLE VIII.

LiTEBART AKB MlSCCLUkNEOUS InT£L|<IGEKCE.

tanrteli states.

PrqfesMor Morse's EUetrihMagnaic Tdsgraph.

As this invention is attracting some interest in this country, and as other
countries are bestowing much attention upon £Iectric Telegraphs construct-
ed on somewhat similar principles, we have thought it proper, in noticing
this invention, to give a few facts and dates to determine who, among all
the rival claimants, is entitled to the honor of a discovery which, to use the
words of a distinguished statesman, " is to make a new era in the progresf
of hnman improvements."

The suggestion of the possibility of conveying intelligence by means of
electricity must have occurred many years since, to scientific and ingenious
men, both in this and in foreign countries, but no practical method has been
devised, until very recently, of putting this possibility to the trial of experi-
ment. We might svippose that Franklin himself would naturally have sug*
gested the idea, but it does not appear that he or any of the philosophers of
his day thought of it. It is stated on good authority that, as early as the
year 1800, the idea was suggested by an individual in this country ; and Dr,
Coz of Philadelphia, m 1816, in a published document, not only avowed his
belief in t)ie possibility of conveying intelligence by electricity, but hinted
at some means of doing it, and predicted that new discoveries in science
would probably accomplish it; yet no invention was made. In Envope,
Prof. Oersted of Copenhagen, only« few years since, (we have not before us
the precise date), snggested the poesibiUty of an electric Telegraph. An^
p^ie of Paris, and Frof. Barlow of London, about the year 1890, both pro-
claimed its possibility, but devised no practicable mode. In lS3Qy Prof.
Morse of the University of the city of New York, while returning Irom
France, nnoonsoions, as we are told, that even the thought of sending in*
teUigence by electricity had ever occurred to another, conceived the idea,
tad devised a mode of eanying it into effect. He invented a systeni of

Vol. XL No. 30 66

sot JUterary and MkeeU. BudUgenoe* [Apui*

sigM or ehftncten by which to read, and % mode of penntpontly seeordiii^
by electricity. On hia arrival he immediately proceeded to have parta of the
apparatus made, aa it ia at present in operation ; and bat for hindtaneea,
not connected with the invention, would have produced the apparatua con-
pieto in J632. The diatinguiahed Prof. Gaoas of Gottingen, about two
years since, (1636), invented a mode of eommunicating intelligence by
means of an electric wire, deflecting a magnetic needle, which mode, we
learn, he has now in use at Oottingen for about three miles. Prof. Wheat*
atone of the London University also invented a mode in 1835 or — 6, using
Jive wires or eiradts, and has constructed a system of signs by the d/^jUttUm
ofmagTUiie fuedles,

.The 'general plan of Prof Morse's Telegraph was first published in April
1837. The first intelligence of Prof. Wheatstone's operations reached this
country in May 1837, one month after Prof. Morae's had been before the
American public. Prof. Morse's plan embraced, from the beginning in
1832, but one wire or circuit. It is now successfully accompliahed by him,
and by it he eaiues a pen permanenily to tmriUtJu characters of hie wUUignnce.
He showed the efficiency of his machinery in July and August 1837, and in
September ^following made trial of it for a distance of half a mile. Since
that time his new machinery with ten miles of wire has been constructed and
is perfectly satisfactory in its opeiation. Eminent scientific men in New
York, Philadelphia, and Washington have witnessed its performance, ap-
prove the plan, and perceive no insurmountable obstacles to its universal
application. Whatever therefore may have been previously hinted in re-
gard to the practicability of an Electric Telegraph, it appears that Prof.
Morse is the first who has devised an original Telegraph accomplishing its
object perfectly. His plan was devised prior to his knowledge of the Euro-
pean inventions of the same name, and accomplishes its object in a totally
difiS?rent mode, more simple, less expensive, and more complete and perma^
nent. It has been introduced to the consideration of Congress, and . we
learn, with satisfaction, that, in all probability, the means for an extensive
trial of this Telegraph will be furnished. Should its success eqaal the ex-
pectations of most who have examined it, the results of this discovery upon
society will be greater than the imagination of the most sanguine can now
distinctly conceive.

Mr. O. A. Taylor's Catalogue of the Library of the Andover Theologieal
Seminary, which we have before alluded* to, Vol. IK. p. 351, ia now complet-
ed, it nuikes a. very portable and subataatial octavo of. 53) pages. It was
oommeneed by Mr. Robinson, late librarian. Mr. Taylor has labored upon
it for two years. Itis in the alphabetical form. The name of the author is
first giv«n, and than all his produotions are arranged under it, except that
whole works are placed first. A short biographical notiee of the author is
prefixed. A foundation is laid by the use of certain characters for a syste-
fluutac Index at some future time. Mr. Taylor baa given not only all the

1838.] LUerarif and Muedl. htdSgenee. S98

^idm of bookf, pampUeti, etc., bat all tbe importent uriidef in the largeft
and most Tduabto w«rks and periodical pablicationa. The number of toI-
«me0 described is not far firom 12,000. Many of them are of great valiie.
A very considerable proportion am in the Latin and German langruagee con-
nected with biblical and theolofpcal stodiee. The library is deficient in
English literatnre. Mf . Taylor win have the thanks of all the friends of the
Seminary and of religion ibr his labor. It is what few persons' will iiilly
appreciate. Industry, perseyerance, accorate and eztensiye bibliographical
learning have been layishly expended. We hope to notice the volume more
iully hereafter.

The cause of science has lately met with a very severe loss in the death
of Nathaniel Bowditch, LL. D., F. R. 8.. president of the American Acad-
emy of Arts and Sciences. He died in Boston March 16, in the 65th year
of his age. His translation of the great work of La Place on Celestial Me-
chanics, to which he added a commentary and many original notes of his
own, has given celebrity to his name throughout the world. His practical
works on navigation are of the highest value.

Mr. Marsh's Icelandio Grammar is in the press at Burlington, Vt^— The
New York Review is to be hereafter united with the American Quarterly.

CSrtest IMUitn.

Mr. WilberfoTce's Life is in the press of Mr. Murray. It will be com-
prised in four Vols. 8vo., with portraits. It is edited by his sons Rev. Rob*
ert I., and Rev. Samuel Wilberforc^?. The Memoirs are drawn from a jour-
nal, in which, during a period of fifty years, Mr. Wilberforce was accustom-
ed to record bis private sentiments and his remarks on the incidents of the
day. The work will be enriched from his correspondenoe with his distin-
guished contemporaries.

Gibbon's History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman £mpire with notes
by Milman and Guizot is publishing in London in monthly volumes. The
original, unmutilated text of Gibbon is given, along with a candid and dis-
passionate examination of his misstatements'on the subject of religion.

Lieutenant * Wellsted's Travels in Oman, tbe Peninsula of Mt. Sinai and
along the Shores of the Red Sea are in press in two Vols. 8vo.

A Catalogue of the Irregular Greek Verbs, with all their tenses extant,
their formation, meaning and usages, has been translated from Buttmann's
Ausftahrliche Spraoblehre, by Mr. Fiahlake.

Leonard Homer, F. R. S. has translated M. Consin*e '* Present State cf
Education in Holland, with special reference to the schools for the working
classes."

The second and third volumes of Mr. Hallam's << Introduction to the His-
toty of Literature in the I6th, 16th, and 17th oenturies," the first volume of
which was noticed In our last No., are now in press.

Dr. Carr has been consecrated bishop of Bombay, and Dr. Spenoer bishop
of Madras ; the last as the successor of the holy and venerated bishop

£34 LUerary and MuoeU. hteOig^mse.

The distribntioB, ^pnniMg, or tmiBlatioii of tiie BedptorM, ia vhole or in
part, has been promoted by the Britiah and Foreign Bible Soeiety, diroctly
fai 66 languages or dialects, indirectly in 69 ; total 135. The number of ver-
sions, omitting those which are printed in diffsrent charaeters only, is ld7.
Of these, 105 are translations never before printed. Issues of Bibles, sinee
the commencement ofthe society, 3,990,678; Testaments, 6,303,967 ; total,
10,393,645. £zpendituie from the commencement, £ 2,291 ,884.

3$elg(ttm.

By recent investigations it was ascertained that the scarcity of Bibles is
very great. In one village, 4 Bible was found, whioh ten or twelve persons
snbscribed for together, and sent one of their numb» into Holland to bay ;
and there it oost them 42 francs. During the last year, 8420 copies of the
Bible were distributed in this country.

Stranss*8 Life of Jesus continues to attract great attention. Its publica-
tion seems to have been the signal for an avowal of infidelity on the part of
multitudes in Germany. The book has been ably examined, and its posi-
tions overthrown particularly by Neander and Tholuck. — Gesenius is now
prosecuting his labors on his Thesaurn8.^-Hengstenberg is regarded with
increasing foar by the enemies of evangelical religion. His views oo church
.governme]}t, church and State, etc. ai'e not of the most telerant order. —
Some of the posthumous works of William von Humboldt are looked for
with much anxiety.— Tbe concluding Nos. of Freytag's Arabic Lexicon do
not yet come to hand. — ^The Leipsic Gazette annoimces that the new num-
ber of Schumacker's Astronomical Notes contains a discovery, made by Dr.
Encke, professor of astronomy at Berlin, that the planet Saturn has three
rings instead of two, as hitherto believed.

The people of Polynesia have no names for many of the animals mentioned
in the Scriptures. They had never seen horses till the missionaries introduced
them. At some of the islands the people had pigs in great abnndanoe, and
they called the horse ** the pig that carries the man." In the FolyneaiaA di-
alects, a vowel intervenes between every two consonants. This made it in-
possible to TahUianizB the word horsef for not only the two consonants must
have been divided, but the letter a, not known in the language, muat have
been changed or omitted. In this ease, the mihsionaries resorted to the
Greek, hippos f and rejecting the s and one p^ made kipo. In reforenee to
haptinm^ there was a native word, whioh signified the application of water,
without determining the precise manner ii\ which that water is ap^ied.
Lest, however, dispute should arise, they resorted, like the English transk^
tors, to the Greek, and ehose'a term which any native can pronounce and
tfompreheiid.

INDEX TO VOL. XI.

A. JhUtquUates Amerieanae noticed 519.

, Jot^k, Wark$ of, noticed 357. jhUiquiHes of the Jews, Di, Palfrey'^

AdnoMcemmUof Biblical ijunoUdg^GO. Lectures oii| xu>ticed 5] 5.

JSttmwiano to Chrittimnty, it^tqueney Appeal, fratemaly to the American
of in Greek and RMum writers 303. Churches, together with a Plan for
The Greeks and RoinanB, in the catholic UnM on Apostolic prind-
time of the apoetles, were not ae- pies 86.
customed to visit Jerusalem S03. B.
The question in reference to those Bailey's Family Preacher, noticed 261 .
writers who flourished from the BaUantme, Ret, E. Translation of
time of Oomitian to the end of the Hengstenberg on the Causes qf the
age of the Antonines 905. Greek Detual qf the Mosaic Origin of the
writers 905. Roman writers 306. PetUateueh 416.
the Christians found able and Barrows, Prof E. P. on the Advance-
In the ng& of the Antonines ment of Biblical Knowledge 60.
eloquent advocates 911. Writ- Bible Dictionary, Union, noticed 245.
ers who entered into eontroversy BUUieal Knowledge, the Adwancement
with the Christians 314. Cresoens o/60.

915. Luoian 216. Celsus 390. In BiesenAaVs Hebrew Lexicon reviewed

the ase of the Antonines the Chris- 4b3.

tians had obtained notoriety 291 — Bush, Prof. Exposition of the Books of

224. Christians not unknown to JoskMflO^ Judges by, noticed' 2S2,
men of letters 296. Eulogists of

the Christians 227. TheEpicureans C.

and Cynics despised the Chris- CathoUc Union on AposioUc Principles,

tians 2S». Plan for, by Dr. Schmutker 86.

Analogies between J^ature, Providence, Christianity, wfrequency of Allusions

ana Grace 344. The fira( ana]og(y to in Greek and Roman writers 203.

Kspeels the qualifications for en- Christian Professor, the, noticed 253.

tennr into the kingdomsy humility Church, PharceUus, Prize Essay by, on

and fiith 345. Seoondiy, they are rdi^ftous Dissensions 259.

fovemed by general laws 347. Classtcs,UtilityoftheStudyoftotheO'
'he laws of each kingdom are logical Students 2B, An edict of the
self-executing 348. There is a emperor Julian, advice of Angus-
striking analogy in the degree and tine 29. The Reformers felt that
mannerof sovereignty exercised in even profane learning was from
each kingdom 349. Necessity for God, and to be applied to his glory
active exeiiions in each of the three 31 . It materially assists in the in-
kingdoms 352. The same apparent terpretation of the Scriptures 39.
mixtnvs of good and evil, order and Refines the taste and auickens the
confbsion, light and darkness, in sense of the beautiful 33. The
each 359. In each God brings classics anciently called the ku-
good out of evil, etc. 357. manities 34. The neglect of clas-
At^gla-Saxon Dictumary, noticed emd sical studies to be attributed, in
«0aiflieiidsd 509. some measuroi to the manner in

has

bdex^

which they are taughi in aoade-

miee uul coUeges 36 etc.
Connection of the Old and JVeio TeMta^

ments, by Prof. Twesten of Berlin

232.
Court of Rome^ History of, noticed 254.
Countif Victor, his Life and Works,

noticed 519.
Oowper, new edition of his works by

Southey and Giimshawe 514.
Oritieal J^oHces 345, 503.

D.

JkiVf Pres. on the edf-deiemdning
Power qf the WiUbOS.

JDdugeSf Historical and Oeologieal,
compared I. Arg^ument from ex-
amination of contents of oarems
and fissares 1. In a cavern in
Yorkshire, more than twenty spe-
cies of animals made out from rel-
ics 2. The deluges of Geology
and of Scripture agree in being
comparatively recent 4. In being
of mat extent 4. The language
of Scripture 5. Of commentatom 6.
Objections 8. Arguments against
the identity of the two deluges ap-

5 ear to preponderate 9. Objections
erived from Geology, etc. against
the truth of the Mosaic history of
the deluge considered 10.—- vix. It
is thought that certain natural pro-
cesses now going on must have
had an earlier date than the Noa-
chian delu^ 10. It was formerly
urged that it is mathematically im-
possible for the present oceans of
the globe to be raised so high as to
cover its whole surface 11 . Some

Earts of the fflobe are said to ex-
ibit no marks of diluvial agency
12. The existence and preservar
tion of the olive on mount Ararat
have been urged as otnections 13.
Change of climate at the epoch of
the geological deluge, etc. 13. An-
other objection is, that pairs of all
the animals on the fflobe could not
*have been preserved in the ark 14.
The present distribution of animals
on the globe^ etc. 16. Many spe-
cies, both of animals and plants,
are ca|>able of enduring ffreat va-
rieties of climate 16. But ue great-
er part of annuals and plants are

confined to ptrticolar districts of
the globe 17. The deluge may not
have been universal 19. A new
creation of animals and plants may
have taken {rface subsequent to thie
deluge 19. Such a hypothesis
probable 21. Could any natural
causes have produced the deluge?
22. Some suppoee the deluge was
caused by the approximation of a
comet to the eartn ; some, by the
sinking down of continents beneath
the ocean, etc. 22. Others impute
it to the sudden elevation of the
bottom of the ocean , etc. ^. Sum-
mary of conclusions from the pre-
ceding discussion 25.

Denial of ike Momde Orim of the
Peniateueh, Causes 4^ 416.

Design of Iheotogieal Seminaries 187.

£.

Edwards, B. B, onihe OmneetUm be-
tween the Old and Jfew Testaments
232.

Europe, State of during the Middle
Ages, by Henry Hallam, noticed 247

Emdmees of the Oenmneness of the

EwaU on the Use qf the Tenses in
. Hebrew 131.

F.
Faith, Vietos of the Reformers on 448.
Family Preacher, die, noticed 261.
Ferdinand and isabeUa, Histoiy of

their Reign, by Prescott 518.
Fish, SamMel, M. D. onihe /Tature of

Instinfit 74.
Fosdiek, D, Jr. o* Literary impos*

teres 39.
Fraternal Appeal to the American

Churches, together with a Plan for

eathoUe Union, on ApostoUe Prmd-

pies 66.

G.

Gospels, the. Evidences of the Genu-
ineness qfy by A. Jforton, Renewed
by M. Staart 265. Genera] re-
marks 265 etc. The work of Mr.
Norton not superfluous 271. Po-
sitions which have been taken by
leading Geologists 992 ete. The
aim of Mr. Morton's book is to ex-
amine the positions 275. Agree-

hdex. BStt

moiit of the iMpeotive copies of the mmplee of diiereptiieyy etc. 331.
four ffoepels, the ^reeent Greek Hat JtMttn Martyr actually quoted
text 276. Interpolationa 276. Wae our canonical g^ospel 339. Mr.
the goepel of Matthew written in Norton aupposed to reject the idea
Hebrew 276. Argument against of inspiration : expressions to be
Eiohhom's positions 278 etc. Evi- regretted 340. Concluding re-
denoe respecting the authors of the marks 341 etc.
gospels to be dertred from the Grtek and Boman writer $^vi^emuney
works of Justin Martyr 296 etc. €f Musiang to Ckristunity m 203.
Supposition that he quoted the GmiMAAios, his edition of Oowperno-
tfoepei according to the Hebrew 301 . ticed 514.
Not probable 3u2. The testimony H.
of Papias as recorded by Ensebius Haekett, Prof, H, B. Translation ^of
304. Spurious epistles 304. Mr. Tsckmurontkeif^requeneyqfJMlu^
Norton's caution commended 305. nons to Ckrutiamty in Greek and
Testimony of Clement of Rome 305. Roman writers 203.
Importance of the author's notes HaUam, Henry, Works qf, noticed ft47,
306. Examination of Griesbach's Head of the Churehf Head over all
celebrated theory respecting the TfangsdH,
Western, the Alexandrian, and the Hebrew Prophets , a new JVanslatiom
Byzantine claases of Mss. 307. The of , noticed 2e0.
author's reasoning highly com- Hebrew Tenses^ Review of Prof. Ew-
mended 308. Hug's recensions ex* old on the, by M, Stuart 131. Com-
amiaed 310. The author's conclu- mendation of Prof £. 1 32. Syntax
sion on the subject of Mss. 310. of the Verb 134. Of the two modes
Commended 311. Various read- with Vav relative or conyersive
ings of the Greek text of the New 137. Vav relative with the second
Test, considered in relation to their mode 137. Vav relative with the-
character and importance 311. Less first mode 141. Participle or rela-
in proportion than in most of the tive tense 4 43. Remarks on the
classic authors 312. Method of preceding account of the Hebrew
detecting passages of spurious ori- tenses 146 etc.
gin 315. No new doctrine diseov* Hengstenberg, Prof, on the Causes of
ered and no old one shaken by the Denial of the Mosaic Origin of
criticism 316. The author's effort the Pentateuch 416.
to show that Matthew's gospel was HRckok^ Prof, L, P. on the Design of
originally written in Hebrew, and Theological Seminaries 187.
his reasons for considering Matt. I. HistoricM and Geological Dduges-
II. etc. wyyosift'fieitf, examined 317 compared 1.
etc. Various readings of the gos- HUehcoekj Prof, on the Hutorical and
pels compared by Orijreii 317. Geological Deluges I.
Correspondenoies of the first three Holy Ghostf on the Sin against 506.
gospeb 318. Discrepancies in Hovey Pref.^ his Letters from ^the-
chronology 321, 336. The suppo- West Indies noticed 512.
sition tliat two of the evangelists
copied, the one from his predeces- I.
sor, and the other from both his Inipojdifies, Literary 39. What are-
predecessors, examined 321. Ori- we to understand oy the expression^
ginof the theory of a FrvCeean^e/i- literary impostures f 39. Three
urn 322. Recapitulation 325. A classes, the first of which are Co-
moro satisfactory method of ac- giarists 41, There have been men,
counting for tbe coincidences of of considerable reputation who
the first three gospels 326. Fur- could unblushingly advocate this
tber consideration of the same 327. species of robbery 42. Example*
The author's theory of an original of its practice among the ancient*
Hebrew goepel examined 330. Ex- 43. Modena ezaii43es: Bacbota^

598

^KvW^PVvA

Bishop of Ugento, Richard Cim-
berlandy Dr. MickUeton, etc. 44.
Rank and wealth have obtained
unmerited eminence in the literary
world at the expense of gifted de-
pendents 45. A curioaft aeooont
Dj D'israeli 46. The second class
of literary impostures consists of
forgers^ 46. Forgeries connected
with religion, 46. Examples since
the christian era and before the
dawn of letters 47. Examples in
more modem times 49. D 'Israeli's
aocoQnt of the forgeries of Joseph
Vella 49. impositions on an En?-
lishman by a Hindoo pundit s3.
Lauder's temporary imposition up-
on the public relating to Milton s
Paradise Lost 51. The poems of
Ossian 57. Frauds of W. H. Ire-
land in relation to the writings of
Shakspeare 57. Playful literary
impositions 58, etc.

h^equency of aUiuions to ChrittumUy
m Gretk and Roman tcritera 203r

Jnsdnct, on the nature ofy 74. Defini-
tion of, 75. Opinions of Descartes,
Reid and Darwin 75. Of Cud-
worth, M. Baffon, M. Reimen and
CuTier 76. Of Dupoat, and of Dr.
Good 77. Instinctive actions 8um
to be perfonned through the. iater-
rention of the will 80« etc.

MsCruetioA PvhUe in Europe^ Report
on 517.

J.

James's Christian Professor^ noticed
253.

JustyUationy Faith and the aettve obe^
dience of Christ, Vietos of the early
Reformers on, ^^Introduction 448.
Bearing of these views upon the
agitating controversies of the times
449. importance of the subject
451. Views on justification 453.
The term, justification, not of re-
cent coina^ 453. The terms, par-
don, forgiveness, and justifica-
tion employed as synonymes 454.
Views of Augustine 454. Of
Oecumenius, Bernard and of John
Calvin 455. Of Ursinus 450. Of
Paraeus 463. Imputation of the
righteousness of Christ and remis-
sion of sins customarily joined in
jostifieatioa 465* Melanothon says

that justificstioii suniiues wtfpw^
ness of sins 466. The French and
Augsburg Confessions unite sub-
stantiallv in the same sentiment
467. Also the Saxony and Belgic
catechisms -468. l/Vendeline re-
marks that they express tlie whole ^
nature of justincation who affirm *
that it consists in the forgiveness
of sins 469. Dr. Tilenus says that
either forgiveness or imputation
taken separatelv expresses the
whole nature of justification 470.
Similar statement of Piscator 472.
The Calvittistic church, at the first,
almost entirely took the ground
that pardon was the whole of justi-
fication 473. The Calvinists grad-
ually began to make a distinction
474. Opinions of Dr. Amandus
Polanus 474. Dr. F. Gomar 476.
He explains forgiveness of sina as
the prior member of justification
477. A modem definition of par^
don the same which the later Re-
formers gave of justification 478.
Recent instances of departure from
primitive Calvinism 479, snch as
that Adam was not created righteous
479. The same the opinion of Dr.
Taylor of Norwich 480. Osiander
cimdemned for maintaining this
opinion 461.

K.
Knowledge, BibUeal, the advancement
of 60. What does a thorough
knowledge of Scripture involve?
A thorough aequaintanee with the
original languages of Scripture ;—
an acquaintance with the geogra-
phy and antiouities of ancient Pal-
estine, etc. ol. An enlarged ac-
quaintance with ancient history 62.
With the internal history of the
ancient world, its iasoral, relicious
and political condition 63. With
the laws of hnman language 64.
The constitution of man consider-
ed as an intellectual and moral
being 65. A right state of heart
65. How may a thorough knowl-
edge of the Scriptures be most
e^tuaUy diffused P We must
have some men in the church who
shall preps every department of bib-

Index.

5S9

liod mnd theoloffieal learaiag to its
utmost limits, 66. The ^rreat body
of the christian ministry must re-
ceive such an education as shall
enable them to avail themselves of
the results of the investigations of
others 69. The original languages
of Scripture, the Latin language 70.
Theological Seminaries, 71., etc.

Lamb Ckarles,hiB works noticed 512.'

seathal might have carried out more
fully his idea of reOniting roots 498.
Roy has not accomplished his plan
of copying each form of every He-
brew word that occurs in the Bible
499. The plan an absurd one QOO.
The author not familiar with the
letters of the cognate dialects 500.
Errors on the word nait 501. On

the word yn^ 502. General opin-
ion of its contents 503.

LoMdig, Rte, k W, an the views oftke ^^if^rPubHc 174 The great want

Reformers an iustifiaOian, faith and '^ ^" ^°""^'J^ **^ ^"»P^^ hbranes

tks active obedience of Christ 448.
Letters from tks West Indies, noticed.

513.
LsJBkographyy Hebrew 4iJ2. Review

of ciesenthal's and Roy's Hebrew

Dictionaries 482. Great recent

improvements in the department of

philology 482. Qualifications of a

lexicographer 483. Changes in the

usages of languages 484. Necessi-
ty of a knowledge of the cognate

(ualects of a language 485. The

lexicographer must discover the

primary meaning of a word and

trace a connection between it and

hs numerous secondary significa-
tions 487. Use of comparative

philology 487. Summary of the

Iexicographer*8 duties 487* Great

learning and useful labors of Ge*

■entUB 488. Comparisons between

174. Arguments for efforts to
found them 175. The whole pop-
ulation personally and vitally in-
terested 176. The interests of
Christianity require it 177. The
condition and prospects efour large
commercial cities both demand and
favor such an efibrt 177. The sev-
eral departments of art, science
anfl literature require $ HOO^OOO to
place them on a respectable footing
in a library of reference 179. Num-
ber of volumes in the principal
public libraries in the United States
180. Libraries of Collets 180.
Of Theological Seminaries 182.
Other public libraries 182. The
principal libraries of Europe 183.
The libraries of the United States
compared with those of Europe 185.
Appeal to American citizens 185.

the Hebrew and the Indo-Eu- f^ ^^^f Impostures 39.

ropean tongues 489. Biesen- I^oture of Europe, in the fifUefUh,

thld's Dictionary exhibits great suieenth and seweniemth emtunes,

accuracy, a familiarity with bib- ^V ^^""^ ^^"^"^^ "^^^ ^47.

lical and rabbinical literature, .^

and an inquiring and philosophical „ .. ^i e* • ^ ^l rr

turnof mind li the author 490. Mayer^Dr.ontheSinagatnstthe Bo-

Roy's Dictionary undertaken on no ^?? .f *^^ "^n^!^' ^ ir - j

setUed principles, extremely care- Jdiddle^ges, CondUian of Europe dur-

less in ito execution, and beUays an in^ the, noticed 247 ^ . .

almost total ignorance of the first J^'^^ries, a new order of, noticed

principles of Hebrew grammar 490. „ .* . . \r-r » - - i

Merits of Biesenthal's work proved -^^^^'f ^^« ofaeP^teuch, causes

by examples 491. ConnecUon be- of the denial (^, A\b,

tweeniVnandH^h492. Singular Mother s Retpiest, the, m^edSiSi.

error of Roy 492. Definition of ^

r^\n by the two writera 493. Re- ^^^ of Instinct, ike, 74.

uniting of nxn and i^stn 495. j^^w TribuU to James B, Taytor no-

.Mistakes of Rov on these words tieed 508.

496. rrnh and e^n 497. Bie- Ifordheimer, Prof eMSOTi Critical Gr^m'

VolJ XI. No.' 30 67

530

Index*

nMr of the Hebrew language^ by^
noticed 2<^2.

Jfordheimeys Revieio of BiesenthaVs
and Roi/s Hebrew Lexicon 4:S2.

Norton, Jindrewa, Evidences of tke
genuineness cf the gospt.ls, by^ Re-
viewed by M. Stuart 2t>5.

^Toye^j George H., .^ new translation
of the HeSrew Prophets^ by^ noticed

aw.

O.

Obedience of Christy the aclive^ Views
of the Reformers on^ 448.

Old and .Veio TestamentSf Connection
off 2tl2. J ntroducTory remarks 232.
'The name, Holy Scriptures, defined
233. How far the Old Testament
can be regarded as the rule of faith
and life for Christians 235. It con-
tains divine revelations and pre-
cepts 2:55. How far these are of
authority 236. The New Testa-
ment not in opposition to tlie Old
237. The Old Testament in con-
trast with the New 240. An over
estimate of the Old Testament by
the older theologians 242. The
religion of the Old Testament not
identical with that of the New 243.

P.

Packard J J. On the utility of the study
of the classics to TheUogical students
28.

Palfrey f J, G. Uis Lectures on the
Jewish Scriptures and^^ntiquities 515

Patton, Pro^H. B. on Public Ldbra-
nes 174.

Pentateuchf Causes of the denial of
the Mosaic origin of the 416. In-
troductory notice 416. Shallow
and skeptical' interpretation 4 IB.
Calvin and his successors 420.
Spencer 421. Clericus425. J. D.
Michaelis 430. Eichhorn's Crit-
ique upon Michaelis 431. .Histori-
cal skepticism 4.35. ' Reverence for
history began to disappear in the
aeventeenSi century 426, — insuffi-
cient to account for the change of
opinion in respect to the Pentateuch
437. Other causes 439. Judgment
of late historians 440, — differs from
t^at of theologians 440. Heeren's
position 441. Johannes V. Mtiller
442. Laden 443. Wachler 444.

Sctifosser and Leo 445. Von Rot-
teck 446. Ideler, a distingaiflhed
chronologist 447.

Persia, Information from, 263.

Peters f Jinzonetta R. Memoir of, no-
ticed 259.

Plan for Catholic Union on ApostoUe
principles 86.

Political Economy, Elements of, nadeed
2.57.

PrescotVs Ferdinand' and Isabella,
noticed 518.

Prophecies^ Principles of interpretimg
the, noticed 257.

Public Libraries 174.

R.

Reformation,, Schmucker's Diseowse

on^ commended 507.
Reformers, Views of, on the doctrine

of justification, faith and ike active

obedience of Christ 448.
Religious Dissensions, their cause and

cvrcy noticed 259.
Responsibility, Limitation of 513.
Ripley, Geo. bis Specimens of Foreign

Literature noticed 519.
Rome, Outline of a history of the

Court of, noticed 254.
Roy's Hebrew Lexicon, reviewed 482.

S.

Saxon-Anglo, BoswortKs Dictionary
of, noticed 509.

Schmueker, S. S., D. /)., Fraternal
appeal of, to the American church-
es, together with a plan for Catho-
lic union on Apostolic principles
86.

Schmucker, Dr. his Discourse on the
Reformation, noticed 507.

South Africa, Wanderings in, noticed
509.

SoutheVt his edition of Cowper no-
ticed 514.

Specimens of Foreign Standard Lite-
rature 519.

Steedman, A. his Adventures and Wan"
derings in South Africa , noticed 509.

Stowe, C. E. 'His Report on Puhlie
Instruction in Europe 517.

Stuart, M. on the Hebrew Tenses 131.

Stuart, M. Review of J^orton on the
Genuineness of the Gospels 265.

Study of the classics. Utility of, to theo-
logical students 28.

Index.

681

T.

TayUfTf J. B, JVeto TrUnde to his Mrniuh
rynotioed 608.

Testaments, Old and Jfew, the ConneC'
tionof2S2,

Theological SeminarieSj Design ofl&T.
To turnish the most efficient min-
istry for the world ItiB. They must
l&bor to extend and perfect theo-
logical science *18ti. To secure
a thorough and specific mental dis-
cipline iUl. And to cultivate a
spirit of warm devotional piety 193.
Tbe^ must be allowed the free in-
vestigation of the Bible 193. Must
not foster a sectarian spirit 195.
Must not interfere in ecclesiastical
government 197. Must stand re-
sponsible to the enlightened senti-
ment of the christian church 198.
Ecclesiastical bodies mustnot cnrant
licenses but at the completion of a
full course of study 199. The
number of theological seminaries
may safely be left to the result of
fair competition 200. They must
be the subjects of the unceasing
prayers of the church 20 L

Tschimer, H. T. on the infrequency
of the allusions to Christianity in
Greek and Roman writers 203.

Tkoesten, Prof, of Berlin, on the Con-
nection of the Old and Jfew Testa-
ments 2:12.

Tyler, W. 8. on the .Analogies between
Nature^ Providence, and Grace,

U.

Vidon Bible Dictionary, noticed 245.

Union, Catholic, on Apostolic princi-
ples, plan for, and Fraternal Appeal,
oif ihr. Senmncker, 86. A few prin-
ciples premised 89. The duty of
Cnristians to endeavor to heal di-
visions and promote unity among
all whom they profess to regard as
disciples of Christ 90 ; — urged by
scriptural injunctions iK). Testimo-
ny of Paul against the spirit of sec*
tarianism 91. Import of the word
<u^cai^ (heresy) 93. Example of the
Jiposlles and of the Apostolic and
subsequent age 95. Differences of
opinion and practice respecting the
observance of the sabbath, etc. ^.
All acknowledged Christians resid-

ing in the same place belonmd to
the same church 98. Banjul ef-
fects of sectarian divisions 99, They
destroy community of interest, etc.
99 ; — impede the impartial study of
the Scriptures 101 ; — retard the
spiritual conquests of Christianity
102 ;— are unfriendly to the spread
of the gospel in heathen lands 103.
The nature of the union of the priin-
itive church 106. It did not consist
in any compact ecclesiastical or-
ganization of the entire church in a
nation under one supreme judica-
tory 106. The first synod or coun-
cil after the apostolic age 108. It
did not consist in the organization
of the whole church under one vis-
ible head, etc. 110. The papal hi-
erarchy 111. The unity of the
primitive church did not consist in
absolute unanimity in religious sen-
timents 113. The Scriptures con-
tain no provision to preserve abso-
lute unity of sentiment 113. Dif-
ferences of opinion did exist among
the primitive Christians 115. The
first means of union was entire uni-
ty of name ,118. The second , uni-
ty of opinion on all fundamental
doctrines 120. The Apostle's creed
121. The Nicene creed 123. The
third bond of union was the mutual
acknowledgement of each other's
acta of discipline 125. The fourth
was sacramental and ministerial
communion, 126 ; the fifth, occa-
sional epistolary communication
128; and the last was occasional
consultation in councils or synods
130.

The same subject continued :)63.
Dates of the successive formation
of the several pfotestant churches:
364. The Lutheran church 364 ;;
Uie German Reformed, the Episco-
pal, the Baptist, the Presbyteriazk,
etc. 365. Causes of sectarian strife
366. Absence of any visible bond
of union, etc. 367. Separate or-
ganization on the ground of doctri-
nal diversity 367. The use of trans-
fundamental creeds 368. Testimo-
ny of Origen 369. Sectarian train-
ing of the rising generation 371.
Sectarian idolatry or man-worship

532

Index.

2173. EzeloBive enltivation of sec-
tarian literature 374. EccleBiasti-
cal pride 374« Conflict of pecuni-
ary interests 375. Theprimitive
church free from this 37o. Apos-
tolic canons 376. Opinion of Ne-
ander 377. Remedy rf esasting evils
379. Universal conformity not re-
^quired, 380. Denominations not
required to renounce their respec-
tive standards 381 . Plan of Union^
firstfeature^SSt, Second feature 283^
Third feature 393. Creed to con-
sist ox two parts 393. Advanta^s
of such a creed, 394 — to keep her-
etics out of the church 394 — to give
Srominence to acknowledged truths
95. Fo«r<A/Ai<«rs, free sacramen-
tal| ecclesiastical and ministerial'
communion400. Fifth feature, co-
operation, as far as practicable, re-
Sirdless of sect 403. Sixth feature,
e Bible the text-book of mstruc-
tion 405. . Settnth feature^ mission-
aries should profess and use the

'common creed 406. Churches
should adopt geographical names
407. The Apostolic Protestant Con-

{'ession 406. Apostles' creed — the
Jnited Protestant confession 409.
Mode of operation 414.
VWity of the study of the classics to
Theological Students 28.

V.
Views of the early Rrformers on the
doctrine of Justification, Faith and
the active obedience of Christ 448.

W.

Wayland, Francis, D, D., Elements rf
Political Economy by, noticed 257.
on the lAmitatton of Human JRs-
sponsibility b)2.

West Indies, uetten from, noticed ,512

Will, Pres, Day on 503.

Y.

Young Disciple, noticed 259.

Xeeatum. On p. 343, line 6 from the top, read ndrade instead offahU,

AMERICAN

BIBLICAL REPOSITORY

COHDUCTSD

BY ABSALOM PETEBS, D. D.

VOLUME TWELFTH— NUMBERS XXXI, XXXIL

NEW YORK:

GOULD AND NEWMAN, PUBLISHERS AND PRINTERS.

BOSTON:

P£RKIN8 St MARVIN, AND CROCK£R it BREWSTER.

1838.

CONTENTS OF VOL. XII.

NO. XXXI.

Art. 1. GxoLOGT aicd Rxvela
TioH. By Hev. Dr. Pond,

Art. II. The Head of the
Church, Head oyer all

TBIiroS ', ILLUSTRATED BT AN-
ALOGIES BETWEEN Nature,
Protidxnce, AND Grace. By
Prof. Tyler. [Ooncloded £?om
Vol. XI. p. 3G3.] .

Art. 111. The TheoLooy oy
Socrates, from Xenophon's
Memorabilia. Transl. from
tht Latin, b^ F. M. Hubbard,

§ I. An Oiitline of the state of
Theology among the Greeks
before Socrates, .

§ 11. Socrates and his Theology,

Art. IV. The Weapons or
Unitbrsalism Retersed.
By ReT. £dwin Holt, .

Page.

22

47

48
52

70

Art. V. Missionary Schools.
By Rey. Dr. Anderson, . . 87

Art. VI. Reasons for the
Study of the Hebrew Lan-
guage. By Prof Edwards, 113

Art. VII. Inquiry respect-
ing THE Original Language
OP Matthew's Gospel, and
THE Genuineness op the

FIRST TWO CHAPTERS OF THE
SAME ; WITH PARTICULAR REF-
ERENCE TO Mr. Norton's
View of these Subjects as
exhibited in his Treatise
ON THE Genuineness of the
Gospels. By M. Stuart,

1. Introductory Remarks. .

2. Testtmony of the Christian

Fathers, ....

3. Other cirenmstanceB which

render the existence of an
early genuine Hebrew Mat-
thew improbable,

133
133

135

163

Page.

4. Examination of Objections, 170

5. Was not the Gospel accord-

ing to the Hebrews itself a
translation from the Greek
Original of Matthew, with
interpolations and altera-
tions.' .... 174

6. Conclusion, .... 177

Art. VIII. What were the
Views entertained by the
Early Reformers, on the
Doctrines of Justification,
Faith, AND the Active Obe-
dience OF Christ. By Rev.
R. W. Landis, Jeffersonville,
Pa. [Continued from Vol. XI.
p. 481.] 179

§11. Views entertained by the
Reformers on the subject of
Faith, 179

Art. IX. The Philosophy of
EccLESiASTES. TrRusl. from
the German MS. of Dr. Nord-
heimer, by Wm. W. Tumep, 197

Art. X. State of the Pres-
byterian Church. By the
Editor, 219

Art. XI. Critical Notices, 2J8

1. Prichard's Physical History

of Mankind, . .238

2. Tieknor's Med. Philosophy, 239

3. Bush's Commentary on

Genesis, .... 241

4. Cud worth's Intellect. Sys-

tem of the Universe, etc. 242

5. Wiseman's Lectures on the

Doctrines and Practices
of the Catholic Church, 243

6. Life and Discourses of Rev.

S. H. Steams, . 245

7. Nordheimer's Heb. Gram-

mar, .... 247

8. Philip's Life and Times of

Whitefield .248

CONTENTS OF VOL. XII.

Page.
9. Memoir of Rev. £lijah P.

Lovejoy .... 249

10. Parker's Journal of an Ex-

ploring Tour beyond the
Rocky Mountains . . 250

11. Home Education . . 251 |

Page.

12. Dillaway'a Cicero I>e

Oratore . . .258

13. Memoir of Mra. Taylor . 253

Art. XII. LiTKRARY AHD Mis-

CELLAITKOUB InTKLLIGENCB, 253

NO. XXXII.

Art. I. Remarks on Voluntary
AND Ecclesiastical Organ-
izations FOR the promotion

of Benevolent Objects. By
Rev. Dr. Woods, , ,257

Art. II. Authority, a Source
OF Moral Obligation. By
Prof. Hickok, .276

Art. 111. The Version of
Ulphilas and the Moeso-
Gothic Language. By W,
W. Greenough, . . 297

Art. IV. Inquiry respecting
the Original Language of
Matthew's Gospel, and the
Genuineness of the first
TWO Chapters of the same ;

WITH particular REFERENCE

TO Mr. Norton's View of
THESE Subjects as exhibit-
ed IN his Treatise on the
Genuineness of the Gos-
pels. By Prof. Stuart, . 315

7. Introductory Remarks . . 315

8. Positive Evidence establish-

ing the Genuineness of
Matthew I. II. . . 317

9. Examination of Objections, 330

Art. V. The Scriptural Idea
OF Angels. By Rev. Dr.
Mayer,

356

Art. VI. Review of Miss
Martineau's Works, . . 389

Art. VII. What were the
Views entertained by the
Early Reformers on the
Doctrines of Justification,
Faith, and the Active Obe-

dience of Christ ? By Rev.

R. W. Landis, .420

§ ni. Views of the Reformem

on the Obedience of Christ, 420
Conclusion, .... 452

Art. Vlll. Causes or the
Denial of the Mosaic Ori-
gin of the Pentateuch.
Translated from the German
of Prof. Hengstenberg of
Berlin. By Rev. £. Ballan-
tine. [Concluded from Vol.
XI. D. 448.] . ... 458

Natunuism, .... 458

Art. IX. Critical Notices, 492

1. Gesenius on the Phoenician

Language, . 492

2. Rome mthe Third Century, 494

3. London Statistical Journal, 495

4. Schauffler's LaBt Days of

Christ, . .496

5. State of Religion in France, 497

6. Report of the Morrison

ffducation Society, . . 498

7. Evangelical Society of Ge-

neva, .... 498

8. Bacon's Discourse on the

Traffic in Spirituous
Liquors, .... 499

9. Coit's and Townsend's Ar-

rangement of the Bible, 501

10. Guizot's History of Civil-

ization in Europe, . . 503

11. Letters on Theron and As-

pasio, .... 504
32. Topical Arrangement of

the Holy Scriptures, . 506

13. Spring's Fragments, . . 507

14. Fosdick's Germ. Grammar, 508

Art. X. Literary and Mis-
cellaneous Intsllioencs, 508

AMERICAN

BIBLICAL REPOSITORY.

NO. XXXI,

JULT^ 1838.

ARTICLE I.
Geology and Revelation.

Bj the Rer. Enoch Fond, D. D. Prof, of Tboolof j in Uio Thaol. Bern. Baofor, Mo.

" 7%y word" saith the devout Psalmist, " m true from the
beginningy and every one of thy righteous judgments endureth
forever.'^ Other systems of doctrine and philosophy have had
their day. They have risen into notice ; have gathered around
them abettors and followers ; have flourished for a time, and
then passed into silence and forgetfulness. But not so the
system of Divine revelation. This has stood the test of time,
and will stand when time shall be no more. It has gathered
strength from the assaults of enemies, and from all the forms of
trial to which it has been subjected, and is as unchangeable and
enduring as the throne of heaven. *^ The grass withereth, and
the flower fadeth ; but the word of our Ood shall stand for-
ever" " Forever, O Lord, thy word is settled in heaven"

Infidels have long hoped and predicted, that the investiga*
tions of science would invalidate the claims of Divine revela-
tion. In this expectation, they have turned from one science
to another, and have eagerly caught at any fact or appearance
which could be tortured into a seeming accordance with their
views. As might be expected, they have had their eye upon
the researches of the geologist. They have anxiously followed
him from steep to cavern, from roountidn height to the deepest

Vol. XII. No. 31. 1

2 Geology and Revelation, [July

«

explored recesses of the earth, in con6dent expectation that
something would be discovered which might be regarded as
contradictory to revealed truth.

Geological investigations have not, indeed, been brought to a
termination ; nor is it likely that they will be for a great while yet
to come. Still, enough has been discovered to entitle geology
to be regarded as a science, and to lead to some very important
general conclusions. My present object is to compare these
conclusions — those of them which may be considered as estab-
lished— with the teachings of the Bible ; and to show, in the
first place, that there is no discrepancy between the two ; but
secondly, that in many points, the former go to illustrate and
support the latter.

The single point, in which there is so much as the appear-
ance of discrepancy between the deductions of geology and the
statements of Scripture, respects the age of this worlds or the
date of its creation. It is assumed by the objector, that the
Scriptures make the age of the world to be something less than
six thousand years— *that immediately previous to the creation
of our first parents, the world itself was created out of nothing.
On the other hand, it has been demonstrated by geologists,
that the world has existed much more than six thousand years ;
that its existence dates back to a vastly remote period ; that
the placing of man upon it is comparatively a recent event in
its history, t need not go into the detail of proof on which
this geological conclusion is based. To my own mbd it b
perfectly satisfactory. I would as soon think of disputing the
Copemican system of astronomy, or the results of modem
chemistry as to the elementary constituents of what used them-
selves to be considered elements, as to call in question the de-
ductions of geology respecting the great antiquity of the world.
There is no accounting for numberless facts which meet us, as
we penetrate into the bowels of the earth, or walk upon its
surface, but by supposing the earth itself to have existed for a
very long period — a period remotely anterk>r to the origin of
our race.

Here then, it is said, is a manifest contradiction between the
deductions of geology, and the declarations of Scripture. The
teachings of the Bible are contradicted by plain matters of fact,
and of course cannot be received as true.

But let us look at this subject again. Let us be sure that
we understand some of the first verses in the Bible, before we

1838.] Geohgy and Revelatum. 3

declare them inconsistent with facts, and abandon the entire
volume of inspiration as an imposture.

In attempting to explain the first chapter of Genesis, I shall
not take the ground that this is mere human tradition, and no
part of the revelation which God has given us. It is an im-
quesiianable part of Divine revelation. We have as much
reason to think this portion of Scripture inspired, as that in-
spiration may be predicated of any other part of the Bible.

Nor shall I take the ground that this chapter, and several
which follow it, are a poetical mythusy a /afr/e, designed to
convey moral instruction under a seeming narration of facts.
For the truth is,' these chapters are not poetry, but simple prose.
They are not a parable, but a plain narration of important
facts ; — ^facts, the truth of which is assumed in the subsequent
parts of Scripture, and on the ground of which the most im-
jportant doctrines are based.

Nor shall I take the ground that the term dayy so frequently
recurring in the first chapter of Genesis, signifies an epoek — an
indefinitely long period of time. I think it signifies a Kteral
day, including the evening and the morning— a period of twenty-
four hours. This is the proper philological interpretation of
the word, as here used ; and we have no occasion, and tjis it
seems to roe no right, to lay it aside, for any less apposite and
less usual sense.*

I have said, that those who represent geology bs inconsis-
tent with Scripture, assume that the Scriptures make the en-
tire age of the world to be something less than six thousand
years. But have they any right to this assumption ? Where
is it said in Scripture that the world we inhabit was made out
of nothing near the time of the creation of our first parents ?
Nowhere. " In the beginning, God created the heavens
and the earth.'' This is an independent, a most important,
and I will add (oonddering the circumstances under which it

* I know that the original word here employed, like our English
word day by which it is translated, is used with considerable latitude
in the Scriptures^ and elsewhere ; so that the particular sense in
which it is used, must be learned from the connection. And in the
first chapter of Genesis, the connection, as it seems to me, determines
that the word stands for a literal day. Each day consists of an eve-
ning and a morning. Besides, on the seventh day the Sabbath was
instituted, which has itever been understood to include more than a
literal day.

4 Oeohgy €md Revekuion. [July

was uttered) a most wonderful proposition ^ — announcing that,
at son:ie time — at some remote period of antiquity — God did
creatBy did bring into existence, the heavens and the earth.
At what time, in the lapse of eternal ages, this great event
took place, we are not informed* What was the appearance
or consistence of the earth, at its first creation, we are not in-
formed. What changes it underwent — what forms of animal or
vegetable life it bore upon its surface — what upheavings and
revolutions passed over it, during the remoter periods of its
history, we are not informed. The geologist has space enough
here, for his deepest, his widest researches. He has scope
enough for any conclusions which he may be led to adopt,
without the remotest danger of trenching on any of the annun-
ciations of revealed truth.

That a very long period — how long no being but God can
tell — intervened between the creation of the world, and the
commencement of the six days' work recorded in the followbg
verses of the first chapter of Genesis, there can be, I think, no
reasonable doubt. It was during this period, that the earth
assumed a solid form. Its heated masses began to C09I and
conglomerate. The primary rocks were cbrystalized. The
transition, the secondary, and the deeper portion of the tertiary
rocks were deposited and petrified. The lower forms .of ani-
mal and vegetable life appeared. Vast multitudes of marine
and amphibious animals — some of them of huge and terrific
forms — lived, and died, and their remains became imbedded in
the solid rocks. Vast quantities of vegetable matter also accu*
mulated on the earth, and was treasured up in its deep founda-
tions, in the form of coal, for the future use and benefit of man.

It is evident that the earth, during this period, underwent
frequent and terrible revolutions. Its internal fires were raging
in their prison-house, and often bursting through the crust
which confined them. The mountains were upheaved from
their deeper than ocean beds ; trap dykes were formed ; and
the stratified rocks were tilted from their horizontal positions in
every direction.

It was subsequent to one of these terrible revolutions, which
had torn the earth from its very centre, merged the greater part
of it beneath the ocean, and destroyed nearly every trace of
animal and vegetable existence, that we have mention made of
it, in the second verse of our Bible. It was then ^naj inM
confused and desokUe, and darkness was upon the face of the

1888.]

Geob>gy and Bevelaiion.

vast abyss. The earth was dark at this period, not because
there was no sun, but because caliginous gases and vapors
had utterly obscured the light of the sun, and shut it out uom
the desolate world.

But God had not abandoned the work of his own bands.
He had nobler purposes to answer by tliis seemingly ruined
woild, than any which had yet been manifested. It was no
longer to be the abode only of saurians and mastodons, and
other huge and terrific monsters, but was to be fitted up and
adorned tor a new and nobler race of beings. Accordingly the
Spirit of God began to move upon the troubled waters, and
order and harmony were gradually restored.

At length ^' God said, let there be light, and there was
light." The dense clouds and vapors which had enveloped
the earth, and shut out entirely the light of heaven, were dissi-
pated, so that it was easy to distinguish between night and day.
^^ And God saw the light, that it was good ; and God divided
the light from the darkness. And God called the light day,
and the darkness he called night ; and the evening and the
morning were the first day."

^^ And God said, let there be a firmament in the midst of the
waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. And God
made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under
the firmament, from the waters which were above the firma-
ment ; and it was so. And God called the firmament heaven.
And the evening and the morning were the second day." The
work here denoted was the elevation of the clouds, and the
separation of the aerial waters, by the visible firmament — ^the
seeming expanse of heaven — ^from those which rested on the
sur&ce of the earth.

^< And God said, let the waters under the heaven be gather-
ed together unto one place, and let the dry land appear ; and
it was so. And God called the dry land earth ; and the gath-
ering together of the waters called he seas. And God saw that
it was good. And God said, let the earth bring forth grass, the
herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after bis kind,
whose seed is in itself, upon the eartli ; and it was so. And the
earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind,
and the tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself;
and God saw that it was good. And the evening and the morn-
ing were the third day." In the course of this day, vast portions
of the earth's surface were elevated, and other portions were de-

6 Geology and R&odatwn. [Jult

pressed. Continents were raised, and the oceans were made to
know their bounds. As soon as the dry land appeared, it began
to be clothed with vegetation. The forming hand of the Crea-
tor covered it, in many instances, with new species of trees and
vegetables, in place of such as had been finally destroyed.

^' And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of hea-
ven, to divide the day from the night ; and let them be for
signs, and for seasons, and for days, and for years. And let
them be for lights in the firmament of heaven to give light upon
the earth ; and it was sp. And God made two great lights ;
the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the
night. He made the stars also. And God set them in the
firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, and to
rule over the day, and over the night, and to divide the light
from the darkness. And God saw that it was good. And the
evening and the morning were the fourth day." The language
here used does not import, that the sun, moon and stars were
now first created,* but only that they were first made to shine
otU upon the renovated earths They now became visible lights
to the earth. The clouds had before Jbeen so far dissipated^
that it was easy to distinguish between day and night ; but now
they were entirely dispersed, and the lights of heaven shone
down upon the earth ^^ in fiiU orb'd splendor."

In all this chapter, as God is speaking to man, so he speaks
after the manner of men, and represents the progression of
things, not with philosophical precision, but as they would have
mpeared to a human spectator. For instance, when it is said
that God made a firmament, we are not to understand that the
seeming canopy above us is a literal thing or substance, called
a firmament, but only that such is the clearance to a specta-
tor on the earth. And when it is said that God made two great
lights, and set them in the firmament, we are not to suppose
that the sun and moon were now first created, and fixed in the

* The original word here translated made (v. 16) is not the same as
that used in the first verse, which properly signifies to create. When
it is said that ^ God tnade two great lights," the meaning is that he
made them to become lights to the earth. The same word is used in the
fourth coniraandment, where it is said that ** in six days the Lord
made heaven, and earth, and sea, and all that in them is." During
the six days, God renewed the face of the desolate earth, and made
the heavens visible, and gave the seos their bounds, and filled earthy
and air, and ocean with their appropriate inhabitants.

1888.] Oeohgy and Revelation. 7

blue expanse, but that such would have been the appearance
to man, had he been i£i existence on the fourth day, when the
clouds and vapors were dispersed, and the sun and moon coin^
menced their shining.

On the fifth day, God peopled the waters with fishes, and
the air with birds and flying fowls.

On the sixth day, he brought forth " the beast of the earth
after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that
creepeth'upon the earth after his kind ; and God saw that it
was good.'' In the course of this day, God created man also,
in bis own image. *^ Male and female created he them. And
God blessed them," and ^ve them dominion over all the crea*
tures that he had made.

** On the seventh day, God ended his work which he had
made ; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work
which he had made. And God blessed the seventh day, and
sanctified it, because that in it he had rested from all his work
which God created and made." Here we have the institution
of the Sabbath — that statedly recurring season of holy rest^
which commenced with the renovation of the world, and is to
continue to the end of it.

It appears, therefore, tliat in the six days' work which has
been considered, we have an account, not of the original creO'
Han of the world — ^this had been created long before — ^butof its
renovation ;— of its being remodeled and refitted, after one of
those terrible revolutions by which it had been desolated^ and
its being prepared for the residence of innocent and happy
man.*

If any are disposed here to inquire, — on supposition the
earth existed for a long period after its creation, before it was
fitted up for the use of man — ^why we have no particular ac-
count of this period in the Scriptures ; it would be enough to
answer that we do not Jcnow. Obviously, however, it was no

* It 18 remarkable that some of the Christian Fathers entertained
similar views respecting the creation of the world, to those which
have been here expressed. Justin Martyr, and after him Gregory
Nazianzen ^ suppose an indefinite period to have elapsed between
the creation, and the first ordering of all things.'' Basil and Origen
" account for the creation of light prior to the fourth day> not by sup-
posing that there was no sun, but that the rays of the sun were pre-
vented by a dense chaotic atmosphere, from penetrating to the earth.*
— iSee Wtnman'i Ltetureif p. 178.

8 Oeohgy and Revelatum, [Jolt

part of the object of the Divine Author of Scripture to gratify
the mere curionty of man. Why have* we no particular ac-
count of the life of our Saviour, between the period of his child-
hood, and that of his public ministry ? Why does the writer of
the Acts of the Apostles leave Paul in his own hired house at
Rome, and not follow him through, to the end of his eventful
history ? It was enough for the inspired writer to make us ac-
quainted with the original creation ot the world, and of its being
prepared for the use of man. This is all in which we have a
direct personal interest. To have proceeded further in the nar-
rative would have been to enter a field of scientific inquiry and
curiosity from which the pen of inspiration is uniformly and
wisely kept aloof.

In view of what has been said, it is evident, to my own mind,
that there is no dUcrtpancy certainly between the teachings of
geology and those of the Bible respecting the date of the world's
creation. Geology assures us that this earth' must have existed
for a very long period— one remotely anterior to the creation of
man ; and we find nothing in the first chapter of Genesis, or
in any other part of Scripture, which is at all inconsistent
with such a supposition.*

But it is not enough to say that the teachings of geology,
and those of the Bible, are not self-contradittory. In various
particulars, as I shall now proceed to show, the foi-mer serve to
illustrate and support the latter.

1. Geology teaches that this world had a beginning. To be
sure, it places its origin at a very remote period. Still there
was an origin — there was a beginning. The organizations on
the earth, and in the earth itself, have uniformly taken place in
an ascending series, feom the less to the more perfect. Trace
now this series backward, and we at length arrive at a period
^hen there were no organizations, and when the earth itself
was not. The geological conclusion therefore is, that the earth
was originally created from nothing. The same also is a doc-
trine of the Bible. ^* In the beginning, God created the hea-
vens and the earth." "Before the mountains were brought forth,
or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the worlds even fit)m

* When this article was written, the author bad not aeen Back-
land's Bridgewater Treatise on Geology and Mineralogy. He has
aince been gratified to learn that his own views of the first chapter of
Genesis agree, to a shade, with those of that celebrated philosopher
and Christian.

1838.] Otology and Revelation. 9

everlasting to everlasting thou art God/' Ps. 90: 2. '^ I wa*
set up from everlasting, or ever the earth wasJ^ Prov. 8; 23.

The geological conclusion that this world must have bad a
beginning is of very great importance in connection with natural
theology. The most plausible of all the atheistical hypotheses
are those which assert the eternity of the world. Without un-
dervaluing anything which has been written with a view to re-
fute these unreasonable suppositions, the ppper refutation of
them is to be sought, and is found, in the world itself. Tracing
back geologically the history of this globe, and (after successive
revolutions) we arrive at a period, when it contained no living
things and when it was incapable of sustaining any form of life
with which we are acquainted. We arrive at a period, when
nought terrestrial existed but the bare elements of nature, and
when in all probability an existence was imparted even to these.

2. Geology teaches that the earth we inhabit is the work-
manship of one God. This is evident from the unity of design
everywhere exhibited in the structure of the globe. The
Bible also teaches the same doctrine. The God of the Bible is
one God — to whom the work of creation is ascribed.

3. Geology teaches that the Creator of the world is a being of
infinite vnsdomy power y and goodness. No one can look into the
interior of the earth, and observe its massive structure and mul-
tiform organizations, and not be convinced that its Maker is pos-
sessed of unlimited wisdom and power. As little can we doubt
the goodness of the Creator. To give but a single indication
of this. Was there no goodness manifested, on the part of the
Creator, in his treasuring up, at a period long anterior to the
creation of our race, those measureless coal formationsy which
are now beginning to be exhumed for our comfort and benefit ?
— No reader of the Bible needs be informed that the creation of
the world is there ascribed to a Being of infinite wisdom,
power, and goodness.

4. Geology teaches that the earth, compared with its Creator,
is a very little thing; — ^that he holds it in his hand, and can
rock it on its base, and upheave it from its deep foundations, at
his pleasure. In literal accordance with this, is much of the
language of the Bible. ^' He taketh up the isles as a very little
thing." '< He looketh on the earth, and it trembleth ; be touch-
eth the hills and they smoke." ^< He stood and measured the
earth ; he beheld and drove asunder the nations ; the everlast-
ing mountains were scattered ; the perpetual hills did bow."

Vol. XII. No. 31. 2

10 Qeohgy and RevelaHan, * [Jdlt

"His lightnings enlightened the world; the earth saw and
trembled ; the bills melted like wax at the presence of the
Lord." At language such as this, infidelity has been accustom-
ed to sneer, and shake her head. " She would not believe
that there lives a Being able or disposed to effect such stupen-
dous changes in our firmly established world. But geology con-
firms the solemn facts, as taught by revelation."

5. Geology teaches that, previous to the creation of man, the
earth was chiefly, and often perhaps entirely, covered unih
wetter. Most of the animals of that period were either marine
animals, or of an amphibious character. Most of the plants and
vegetables werc such as grow in marshes and fens. The strati-
fied rocks from the lowest to the highest, are all to be referred
to the action of water. The bowlders which occur in the ter^
tiary formations; the regular layers in clay pits and other
places below the diluvium, all proclaim that, at the period im-
mediately preceding the creation of man, the earth must have
been almost entirely covered with water. — ^This conclusion is
in literal accordance with the representations of Scripture.
While the ruins of a previous organization lay formless and deso-
late, " darkness," we are told, " was upon the face of the deep,
and the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters" it
was these tertiary waters which were divided by the firmament
on the second day ; and were gathered into seas and oceans on
the third.

6. Geology teaches that man, and most of the present races
of animals, have not existed on the earth more than a few thou-
sands of years. In the transition and secondary formations, and
in the deeper portions of the tertiary, we find no traces of human
beings, or (with few exceptions) of such animals as now exist.
Indeed, it is not at all likely that man could have lived on the
earth at that period, had he been placed here. Dragons, and
mighty lizards, and other frightful amphibious creatures were
then the lords of the creation. It is only in the upper tertiary
and diluvial formations, that we find the remains of such animals
lis now exist, and in some few cases, perhaps, the bones of men.
Now this shows conclusively that man, and the present races of
animals, are among the comparatively recent inhabitants of the
earth. They cannot have existed on it more than a few thou-
sands of years. The Scriptures certify us of the truth of this im-
portant geological conclusion. They inform us definitely, that
man, and the other animals now on the earth, were created lesd
than six thousand years ago.

1638.] Geology and Revelation. 1 1

7. It is a remarkable fact, that in those geological formation^
which are supposed to have been deposited before the forma-
tion of man, there have been found, as yet, no literal serpents;
u e. reptiles without legs or fins, and which creep upon the
belly ."i^ Of the general class of serpents, or of what would have
been serpents, if they had gone upon the belly, there were rep-
tiles in abundance, of various sizes and forms. But they all
were furnished with legs, or fins, or wings, or paddles, or some
means of locomotion, beyond what belongs to the proper ser-
pent. If this is a fact, as I believe it is, in what way is it to be
accounted for ? There is nothing certainly in the organisation
or habits of the proper serpent which unfit him to have lived
among the saurtans of the secondary formation. On the con-
trary, all that we know respecting him would seem to adapt
him precisely to that period, and to the state of the then exist-
ing earth. Why then do we find no proper serpents there, and
nowhere, until after the creation of man ? The writer of the
book of Genesis assigns a reason. On the apostasy of man,
the serpent tribe, or a large proportion of them, became divested
of some of their more important members, and were henceforth
doomed to roll, and gather their meat, upon the naked earth.
'^ Upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat, all the
days of thy life." Chap. 3: 14.

8. Geology teaches that, at a period more recent than the
creation of the present races of animals, the earth has been
covered and washed with a deluge of waters. The proof of
this is furnished everywhere. We cannot dig into a sand hill
or gravel pit In any place, without discovering evidence of this
deluge. We learn, too, firom various indications, such as the
deltas at the mouths of rivers, the amount of lava which has
subsequently been issued from volcanoes, and the detritus which
have fallen from the sides of mountains, that this terrible catas-
trophe cannot have been a very remote event. We know^
firom bones which are found in the diluvial formations, that it
occurred since the existence of the present races of animals,
and probably since the existence of man. The Scriptures in-
form us definitely when this great event did occur, and why ;
and its representations accord entirely with the conclusions of
science on the same subject.

* I state this fact according to the best of my knowledge. If I am
not correct, I hope some one of our learned geologists will correct me*

12 Geology and Revelation, [July

9. Geology teaches that tiie deluge, of which we speak,
must have come over the earth suddenly, by some violent in-
terruption of ihe regular course of nature. The waters seem
to have rushed with great violence from the north to the south,
overtopping the highest mountains, and carrying along with
them prodigious quantities of stones and earth. As to the ex-
tent and suddenness of the deluge, the Bible teaches the same
doctrine. We are told expressly, that the waters covered the
highest mountains. We are told too, that the guilty inhabi-
tants of the earth " were eating and drinking, marrying and giv-
ing in marriage, and knew not" — so sudden was the event to
them — ^they " knew not, till the flood came, and swallowed
them all up." Matt. 24: 37—39. The fountains of the great
deep were suddenly broken up, and the waters seem to have
rolled over them in one wide wave of instant desolation.*

10. Geology informs us that the same species of animals ex-
isted before the deluge, which exist now. Consequently, they
must have been, in some way, preserved through the deluge,
or (contrary to previous analogy) the same races which had
been destroyed must have been re-produced afterwards. The
Scriptures inform us that the different kinds of ante-diluvian an-
imals were preserved through the deluge, and how they were
preserved. They were safely lodged with Noah in the ark.

11. Geology indicates that there have been violent volcanic
eruptions, near the site of the ancient Sodom and Gromorrah ;
and that what is now the Dead Sea was, in all probability, sunk
in one of these eruptions. The account given in the Scriptures
of the destruction of Sodom and the cities of the plain, is alto-
gether coincident with these indications.

12. Geology teaches that, as the earth we inhabit has under-
gone already repeated revolutions, in whicli it has been rent
from its deep foundations, and the races of creatui*es existing on
it have been destroyed, to give place to others of a more per-
fect organization ; so, in all probability, another terrible revolur
tion awaits our globe. It is to be destroyed (so to speak)
again ; and fitted up again, to be the habitation of nobler races
of beings than those which now dwell upon it. Such, reason-

• Without Houht, there wna prrent nnd incessant rain, at ihe time of
the coming in of the dehiire ; but that t\w event wus not caused by
mere rain, is evident from the nnttire of tho cnse, nn well as from ilie
expreas langiMge of Scripture, G«ii. 7: J].

1838.] Geology and Revelation. 13

ing from analogy, are the deductions of geology, in regard to
this momentous subject. And these deductions are in perfect
accordance with tne teachings of revelation. The present
earth is to be destroyed— ^t least, the present organization of
it ; after which ^^ we look for a new heavens, and a new earth,
in which dwelleth righteousness.'' 2 Pet. 3: 13.

13. Geology renders it altogether probable, that the next
overwhelming destruction of this world will be by fire. The
earth is full of the most combustible materials ; and it is on fire
even now. The smoke of its burning is ascending up from a
thousand furnaces. Its molten lavas are belching forth from its
heaving bosom, and pouring down the sides of its mountains,
and scorching its plains. We have about as much evidence
geologically that this earth is one day to be destroyed by fire,
as we should have that a house would be. destroyed by fire,
when we saw the smoke and flame issuing from its roof, and
bursting forth from its opened windows* Now the Scriptures
expressly assure us that this earth is one day to be destroyed
by fire. *' The heavens and the earth which are now are kept
in store, reserved unto fire^ against the day of judgment, and
perdition of ungodly men." ^^ The day of the Lord will come,
as a thief in the night ; in the which the heavens shall pass
away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fer-
vent heat, the earth also, and the works that are therein, shall
be burnt up." 2 Pet. 3: 7, 10.

14. I shall notice but another of the coincidences between
the teachings of geology, and those of revelation. It appears
irom both these sources of evidence, that we are living, every
day, on the sovereign forbearance and mercy of the Supreme
Being. Nothing can be more critical, startling and (were it
not for the Divine forbearance) alarming, than is our situation,
and that of every other human being, viewed geologically. It
is known that the heat of the earth increases, in regular pro;
portion, the deeper we penetrate into its bosom. Should this
proportion of increase continue, as we descend into the earth,
(and no reason can be assigned why it should not) at the depth
of a few miles only we should reach a temperature which would
instantly melt the solid rocks. The probability therefore is,
that the unknown interior of the earth is one vast sea of liquid
fire; or at least, that it consists of materials which would in-
stantly take fire, and rage with resistless desolation, the moment
they should come in contact with the waters of the ocean

14 Geology and Reodation. [Jult

which roll above them. It is these pent-up fires which have
already upheaved the mountains, and shaken whole continents
in a single earthquake."*^ It is these which have rived the solid
rocks in sunder, and streamed up lavas through them, in the
form of trap dykes, for many thousands of feet. It is these
which are smoking in the craters of volcanoes, and boiling in
their bosoms, in every part of the earth. Here then we live,
on a thin and already broken crust, which is extended over
a vast ocean of liquid fire. And why do we live here at all ?
Why do not the smothered flames burst out and consume us 7
It is only because of the Divine forbearance and mercy. It b
only because, as the Scriptures express it (speaking in reference
to this very subject), " God is long-suffering to us ward, not
willing that any should perish, but that all should come to re-
pentance." 2 Pet. 3: 9. It is God, in his mercy, who holds
these awful fires in check. It is God who puts his great hand,
so to speak, upon, the smoking crevices of the heaving earth,
and bridles in the smothered flames — ^till all the purposes of
his grace are accomplbhed — ^till the great moral crisis of the
world has come, — and then its physical crisis will come in a
twinkling. Then the impatient fires will be let loose, and the
whole fi:ume of nature will be speedily dissolved.

In view of the interesting and important coincidences here
noticed between geology and revelation, it surely is not enough
to say of the former science, that it is not inconsistent with re-
vealed religion. It is the handmaid of revealed religion. Its
voice, on a great many points, is but the echo of that louder
and more intelligible word, which proceeded from ancient men
of God, who " spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.''
The inquisition which has been made in modem times into the
interior structure and past history of the earth demonstrates
that the God of nature is the God of the Bible, and that this
holy book may be depended on, as a faithfiil exposition of his
truth and will.

The time is within the recollection of many now living,
when infidel writers were confident in their anticipations that
the discoveries of the geologist would overthrow utterly the
system of revealed truth. Brydone, Voltaire, and the French

* The earthquake which destroyed Lisbon, in 1755, wna felt in
Iceland, and in other places in the north of Europe ; — an indication
thai its cauae must have reached nearly to the centre of the earth.

1888.] Oeology and JUvelaHon. 15

infidels generally exulted in the belief^ that a light was beaming
from the bowels of the earth, which would confound the advo-
cates of Scripture, and explode utterly the christian revelation.
The issue of these high and boastful expectations is now before
us. The investigations of geologists have been prosecuted (as
they should have been) with the utmost ardor* Every acces*
sible point, whether oi mountain height or of ocean depth— -of
mine or cavern-— of island, shore, or volcanic steep, has been
explored ; and the conclusions of all respectable geologists are
now decidedly in favor of Christianity. The more distmguish*
ed geologists, both of our own country and of Europe, are pro-
fessed Christians. Several of them are christian ministers.
Instances might be mentioned, in which geological investigations
have served to remove doubts in regard to the Divine authority
of our sacred books, and confirm the unsettled faith of the
skeptical inquirer. And why should they not ? The coinci-
dences which we have traced between the teachings of geology
and those of revelation are sufficient to convince any one, that
the consistent geologist must be a Christian ; — ^that the unbe-
lieving and undevout geologist is mad.

The disappointment of infidels in regard to the results of
geological inquiry is not a solitary one. A great many of like
nature have been inflicted on them, in the progress of investi-
gation on other subjects. A few of these it may not be inap-
propriate very cursorily to notice.

Within less than a century it has been confidently pretended,
that human beings are of different races. They are not all
the descendants of a common father. God hath not " made of
one blood all the nations of men, that dwell on the face of the
whole earth." The representations of the BiUe on this sub-
ject are false. ^^None but a blind man," says Voltaire, '* can
doubt that the whites, the negroes, the Hottentots, Laplanders,
Chinese, and American Indians, are distinct races." This as-
sertion of the sage of Femey, like most of his other impious
assertions, was echoed and reechoed by his numerous satellites.
But in the present stage of scientific inquiry in regard to the
natural hbtory of our race, the man who should utter such a
sentiment would be scouted. It has been satisfactorily ascer-
tained, after the most careful metaphysical and anatomical re-
search, that the human family are unquestionably a single fami-
ly, and that the declarations of Scripture on this subject are true.

It has been pretended, within the last century, that the dif-

16 Qeolog}f and Revelation. [July

ferent languages spoken on the earth are so immensely numei^
0US9 and so widely distinct, as to give the lie to the account in
Genesis, as to the confusion of tongues. This subject has been
investigated anew, and investigated with great care and labor.
The result will be presented in the language of a learned ar-
chaeologist of the present day. After having expressed the
opinion that the radically distinct languages spoken on the face
of the earth are few. Dr. Wiseman adds, " We are driven to
the conclusion that, on the one hand, these languages must
have been primarily united in one, whence they drew the com-
mon elements essential to them all ; and on the other, that the
separation between them, which destroyed no less important
resemblances, could not have been caused by any gradual de-
parture, or individual development, but must have been occa-
sioned by some violent, unusual, and active force, sufficient
alone to reconcile these conflicting appearances, and to account
both for the resemblances and the differences."''^ Such is the
conclusion of mere scientific research, in regard to the diffisrent
languages of men. It must be evident, at a glance, how exact-
ly it accords with the representation given in the Bible.

Within the last two hundred years, the friends of revelation
have been often assailed with the pretensions of some of the
nations of the East to a prodigious antiquity. The Chinese
and Japanese, the Egyptians and Hindoos, we have been told,
possess unquestionable historical records, and astronomical ob-
servations which carry back their origin to thousands and per-
haps millions of years previous to the Mosaic account of the
creation of man. The taunts and sneers, the boastings and
exultations of infidel writers and talkers on this subject, have
been loud, and confident, and long. But with persons of in-
formation, of whatever religious sentiments, they have come to
a final end now. The whole matter has been investigated ;
and the result is, that after every allowance which can reason-
ably be made, the Chinese, Japanese, and Hindoos have no
claims to an antiquity higher than the days of Abraham. Egypt
was settled at a very early period ; but there are no traces of
Egyptian history until about two centuries after the deluge. It
would be impossible here to go into particulars on the interest-
ing subject of antiquities ; and yet there are a few incidents too
amusing and instructive to be altogether passed over.

* Lectures, etc. p. 67.

1838.] Otology and Revelation. 17

Less thaa fifty years ago, an Egyptian relic called the zodiac
of Dendera, was transported into France. It was covered with
unintelligible figures and hieroglyphics, add was declared by the
infidel savans to be of a very remote antiquity. They did not
doubt that it had existed long anterior to the Mosaic account of
the deluge, or even of tlie creation. But at length the hiero-
glyphics are deciphered, and the hand writing on the zodiac of
Dendera is read ; when it appears, that it dates back only to
the time of the Roman emperors, somewhat later than the
commencement of the christian era !

In the last century, there was a Hindoo work, strongly re-
sembling, in many points, the christian Scriptures, translated
from the Sanscrit, and published. It was called the Ezour
Veda. Voltaire pounced upon it at once, declared it a work
of great antiquity, and had no doubt • that the leading facts of
the New Testament were borrowed from it. What then is
the history of the Ezour Veda ? The matter has been fully
investigated, so that there is no longer any doubt or uncertainty
respecting it. The E^our Veda was written by a Jesuit mis-
sionary, in the year of our Lord 1621, and with a view to pro-
mote Christianity among the Brahmins of India.

It used to be said that the account given in Exodus of the
building of the tabernacle could not be true; because the ma-
teri^s composing it could not have been furnished at that early
period. The arts were not sufficiently understood. But it
has been recently discovered that the arts were at their great*
est perfection in Egypt, at the time when the Israelites so-
journed there, and became '' skilled in all the wisdom of the

"fe

gyptians

»

It used to be said, on the authority of Herodotus, that the
ancient Egyptians drank no wine ; and of course that the story
of Pharaoh's butler, recorded in Genesis, could not be true.
But the researches of Champollion and others have settled the
question, that ancient Egypt abounded in vineyards, and that
its inhabitants were in the constant use of wine.

It has been said a thousand times that, admitting the Scrip-
tures to have been originally inspired, they may have been es-
sentially corrupted. The copies have been tampered with ;
they have been interpolated. Passages have been foisted in,
and foisted out, to suit the convenience of interested individuals, .
till we can have no confidence in the accuracy of what remains.
To this, it need only be said in reply, that the subject has been

Vol. XIL No. 31. 3

18 Geology and Revelation. [Jult

laboriously and critically examined, and it has been ascertained,
to a demonstration, that the various readings are of no es9eniioi
moment. They are somewhat numerous, as might be expect-
ed, the books having passed through the hands of thousands of
transcribers ; but in ninety-nine cases out of a hundred, they
consist in the mere accidental change of a letter, or a point,
which makes no essential variation in the sense.

These instances have been introduced for the purpose of
showing, that the disappointment of infidels, in regard to the
results of geological inquiry, has not been their only disappoint-
ment. It is but one among a great many others of a similar
character. Defeated in one course of inquiry, they have fled
to another ; and foiled here, they have resorted to a third.
They have appealed to the heavens for a confutation of our
sacred books. They have cried to the sun, and moon, and
stars, * Come, curse ye ihem from thence.' They have uttered
the same cry to the rocks and caverns of the earth, ^ Come,
curse ye these hated books from thence.' They have looked
to hoary legends, and crumbling monuments, and the catacombs
of ancient kings, and have said in despair, ' Come, curse ye
them from thence.' But the curse, in every instance, has been
turned into a blessing. And so it always will be. Scientific
investigations, fairly and thoroughly conducted, must always
turn to the furtherance of Christianity. For what is science,
but a knowledge of nature's laws ? And what are nature's
laws, but rules which the Supreme Being — ^the God of the
Bible, has prescribed to himself, in carrying into efiect bis vast
designs ? The God of nature and the God of the Bible are
identical ; and hence a consistent and thorough investigation of
nature — ^the more thorough the better — roust always tend, as
in the case of ^ology, to illustrate the nature and support the
evidence of Bible truth. None but smatterers, dabblers in
the study of nature, as a general thing, become infidels, or are
in«any particular danger of becoming such. Was Newton an
infidel? Were Boyle, and Bacon, and Leibnitz infidels?
Were Cuvier, and Davy, and Bentley infidels ? Yet before
these hierophants in nature's temple, the puny infidels of mod-
em times may well retire abashed, and ^^ hide their diminbhed
beads."

** No system ever laid itself open more completely to detee-
uon, if it contained any error, than that of Christianity. No
book ever gave so many clues to discovery, if it tell an untnitb,

18380 QtoU^ and Revelaiicn. 19

as the sacred volume. In it we have recorded the eailiest and
the latest physical revolutions of our globe ; the dispersion of
the human race ; the succession of monarchs in the surrounding
countries, from the time of Sesostris, to the Syrian kings ; the
habits, manners, and languages of various nations ; the great
religious traditions of the human race ; and the recital of many
marvellous and miraculous events, not to be found in the
annals of any other people." Add to this, that it is the work,
not of one hand, but of many, between whom there could have
been no collusion or design ; and I appeal to the considerate
reader, if there ever was a book which, if untrue, if an imposi-
tion, presented so many chances for detection and exposure.
And yet its leaves were thrown fearlessly open, from two to
three thousand years ago, to the investigation of philosophers
and critics — to the scrutiny of friends and foes. Its leaves have
lain unfolded fitun that time to the present, inviting discussion
— ^inviting research ; saying virtually, like its great author,
' Testify agcdrut me, if you canf and it has passed the ordeal;
it has stood the test. Its evidences, so far irom being weak-
ened by the labors of critics, the researches of philosophers, and
the lapse of time, are becoming continually strengthened.
Dark passages are brought out into light. Seeming discrepan-
cies are reconcUed. What were regarded as diffioplties two
hundred years ago are found such no longer. ^^ Every science,
every pursuit, as it makes a step in its own natural, onward
progress, increases the mass of our confirmatory e¥idence."
The very efforts of infidels are made to recoil on their own
heads and are over-ruled for the establishment and advancement
of the gospel. And shall Christians tremble now, for the safe-
ty of their precious ark ? Shall they fear now, that the progress
of any real science can shake the foundation of their hopes ?

There are many Christians, it may be feared, who have no
practical conception of the unmoveable security of that founda-
tion on which it is their privilege to stand. They are easily
terrified at appearances. The boastful pretensions of some infi-
del hypothesis, some misnamed science, alarms them. Or what
is worse, they are drawn away, it may be, for a time, from the
clear shining of the light of heaven, to follow in the glare of
some meteor, or mock sun. The subject here discussed is cal-
culated to impress upon all Christians the folly of such terrors—*
the guilt and danger of such aberrations. In the faith of the
goepel, we have a rock beneath our feet ; and it is our own

20 Oeology and Revelaium. [ Jult

fault if we leave it, and become lost and buried in the sands.
" We have a sure word of prophecy, to which we do well to
take heed, as to a light shining in a dark place ; " and it is our
own fault, if we turn from it, in the pursuit of wandering stars.

There will be dreams and visions, plausible theories and lying
vanities, in days to come, as there have been in days past.
There will be false pretenders to science, speaking great swell*
ing words, and leading unwary souls astray. But let the Chris-
tian possess himself in perfect peace, as most assuredly he is in
a situation of perfect security. The storm may rage around
him for a season, but it will pass over. The lightnings may
flash- and the thunders roar, but they will ere long be hushed.
And Christianity will come out of every new trial, as it has out
of every previous one, strengthened in its evidences, and not
weakened — victorious, and not vanquished.

But in speaking thus confidently of the trutli of Christianity —
of its eternal, inflexible truth, are those who profess it aware, in
all cases, of what they affirm ? What is Christianity 1 What
does the sacred volume teach 1 Its conclusions, in many points,
are coincident, as we have seen, with those of science ; but in
various other po'mts, it discloses what no mere science ever
taught, or ever can. It publishes truths — and this is the reason
why it has been so violently assailed — ^truths, humbling to the
pride of man, startling to his fears, wounding to his carnal peace,
and fatal to his unfounded hopes. It tells of guilt — awful
guilt ; and of impending judgment — awful judgment. It tells
of a Deliverer, who saves all that embrace and follow hini, but
who punishes all others with an aggravated condemnation. It
tells, not only (like geology) of melting elements and burning
worlds, but of a great white throne, and of him who is to sit
upon it, before whom the earth and the heavens are to flee
away. It shows us the rising dead, the assembled worlds, the
opened books, the final awards. It shows us heaven — and it
shows us hell. It calls us to look upward, and behold the uii-
mingled joys and glories of the saved. It permits us to look
downward, and listen to the wailings of the lost.

There are truths (and they are truths, if Christianity is true)
which, for solemn interest and impression, cast all others into the
shade. Here are truths, on the heights of which the Christian
may plant himself, and look far down upon mere Questions of
science, as manhood looks up6n the baubles of infancy, or as
angels may be supposed to look upon the trifling pursuits of men.

1838.] Oeology and ReeeUUian. SI

Of the reader of these pages, may I be permitted to iDquirey
before we part, Do you believe the truths of the Bible 1 Uare
you disbelieve them 7 Or perhaps I might better inquire, Dare
you believe them 1 Dare you feel, and live, and act, in all your
intercourse with the world, as though the Bible was the truth
of God?

I know there are some, who are very ready to profess their
belief of the truth of Chrbtianity, and then live as though there
was no truth in it. But what good can such a belief of Chris-
tianity do ? Must it not to those who persist in it, do immense
hurt ? Must it not deepen the stains of their guilt, and aggravate
their final condemnation ?

I know, too, that there are some, who would receive Chris-
tianity in the gross, while they reject it piece-meal. They
would have the credit of receiving it, while they are bent upon
explaining away it^ solemn truths. But what good, I ask again^
can such a reception of Christianity do us ? What good can the
mere covers of the Bible do us — although they be gilded
covers — when its precious contents are all torn out 7 What
good can the chapters and verses, the words and the letters of
the Bible do us, when their solemn meaning is discarded ?

Assuredly there is but one course which those who have the
Bible, and who profess to believe it, can with propriety pursue.
Let them henceforth live as though it were true. Let them
shape their faith and form their characters according to it. Con-
sistency requires as much as this of them ; and the God of the
Bible requires no more. A character consistently formed on
the basis of the Scriptures is a christian character and eslitles
its possessor to the Christian's reward.

82 The Head of the Ourch, [ Jult

ARTICLE II.

The Head of the Church, Head over all things ; il-
lustrated BT Analogies between Nature, Proyidbnce,
AND Grace.

By W. a Tjla, Prof, of LangatfM, Aahmit Oolltft. [OoBoloded fnia VoL 33. p. 868.]

8. The order of proceeding in nature, providence and grace
alike b gradual* The processes are never hurried, often ex-
ceedingly slow. The growth of the plant, the animal, the
man is by almost imperceptible gradations. Human character
and condition are formed and decided by steps equally gradual.
And the same is true of the christian character and state.

Look at the same law of order on a larger scale. The work
of creation occupied six natural days according to the common
understanding of the sacred record. According to the inter-
pretation of many philologists, and the records of geology,
many thousand years were occupied in preparing the earth to
be a suitable habitation for man.

How slow is the process of civilization, and the progress of
society. All Europe was overrun with savage tribes firom its
first peopling till the supremacy of the Roman empire, and the
larger part of it remained in a savage state till after the refor-
mation. It was only within a century, that government began
to be administered for the good of the people ; and according
to the analogy of past history, many and many a year must
roll away, before this will become the end of all government.

We need not be surprised then at the slow progress of
revelation and spirittud renovcUion* The human race lived
2000 years without any written revelation, and 8000 years
more had elapsed, before the canon of Scripture was completed.
A third period of 2000 years has almost passed away, and not
one fourth of the human race bear so much as the christian
name. Not one fourth of these have the Bible in their own
tongue and are able to read it ; and of these again, not one
fourth probably are real and spiritual Christians. Yet the pro-
cess has been ever going on and is destined to go on, till the
world is'converted.

There is the increasing twilight, the gradual dawn, and the
slowly advancing day alike in nature, proindence and grace.

1838.] Head over dU Thingi. S3

Everywhere, in every thing in our world, infancy, childhood,
youth, manhood succeed each other by almost imperceptible
stages.

9. This law of order is not only gradual but progressive.
There is a gradual process of improvement or advancement alike
in nature, providence and grace. '' First the blade, then the
ear^ then the fulUcom in the ear." '' The path of the just is
as the shining light, that shineth more and more unto the per-
fect day." These similes rest on the analogy between the
natural and the spiritual worlds, of which I am speaking ; and
exhibit the order of every thing, which we see under the di-
vine government. If " order is heaven's Jirst law," progres-
sion is its second, and no less universal, than the first. FoT'^
titular illustrations without number will be suggested from the
similes of the Bible and from every reader's own observations
and reflections. We will confine our attention to the following
of a more general nature.

According to the first chapter of Genesis, the order of crea-
tion was as follows : first inorganic matter, then successively
grass, the herb yielding seed, the fruit tree yielding fruit, rep-
tiles, the monsters of the deep, the fowls of the air, the beasts
of the field, the cattle after their kind, and man in the image of
God. There is obviously a constant progress from good to
better, from less perfect to more perfect forms of organizatbn
and modes and ranks of existence. Now whether geology
presents us with a record of this same creation, as some main-
tun, or as others hold, carries us back to an earlier series of
creative acts succeeding each other at long intervals, all agree,
that it exhibits the same general law of progression fiY)m the
rudest mineral up through successive stages to the most per-
fect animal — ^from mere chrystalization to vegetation, from im-
proving vegetation to dawning sensation, from advancing sensa-
tion to commencing sagacity or intelligence, and from rising in-
.telligence to reason and moral sense, where the progression
ceases to be transferred from one species to another, but will
go on in the same species through the countless stages of im-
provement, to which man is destined^ during an endless exis-
tence.*

'' * Geology showB us, that organic beings became more and more
perfect from the commencement of life on the earth to the time of
man's appearanoe.^ — JIf. Bozet

See also Buckland, chap. 12. Says Kirhy (Bridgewater Treatise

84 The Head of the Church, [Jult

It cannot be denied, that there has been a progression in the
providentiid developmeru of nature's resources to the know-
ledge and use of man. Look back upon the history of our
own country and you see a condensed but faithful epitome of
the world's history in this respect.

Little more than two centuries ago, the savage roamed un-
disturbed over the whole continent, beheld with superstitious
amazement or stupid indifference all the energies and operations
of nature, and suffered the pangs of want and starvation amid
all the exuberance of fertile prairies and teeming forests, mighty
rivers and grassy meadows, tropical suns and fertilizing showers.

But the forest has been gradually felled and the prairie sub-
dued ; boundless fields of grain and fruit drink in the rain and
the sun-shine ; the produce of every clime is borne on the
mighty rivers, wafted by the wind that whistled idly along their
channels, or propelled by steam, that has been elicited from
their own waters by fuel, which once stood embowering them
above, or lay imbedded beneath and by their side, and where
thousands starved, millions now live in plenty and luxury and
hundreds of millions might live upon the new and vast re-
sources, which are in a process of daily development.
Throughout the world, society on the whole has been on the
advance, government has been gradually improved in theory
and in practice, the arts and sciences have multiplied and ad-
vanced, and the means of subsistence and happiness have
greatly increased. There seems to be in society a capacity
and a tendency to progress unto perfection, which it is not un-
reasonable to suppose it may attain in another and a better
world.

Religion has also been progressive. Universal idolatry was
followed successively by the patriarchal, the Mosaic and the
christian dispensations, each of which was a great advance upon
its preceding era. The true religion was confined at first to a

chap. 4.) ^ The first plants and the first animals are scarcelj^ more
than animated molecules and appear analogous of each other ; and
those above them. in each kingdom represent jointed fibrils. It is
singular and worthy of notice, that the Creator after the creation of
inanimate matter probably first imparted the living principle to bodies
of the same form with the molecules and fibrils, into which that mat-
ter is resolvable, thus uniting by common characters things essentially
distinct, and preserving unbroken that wonderful chain, which links
together all created things."

1838.] Head wer attlTiings. S5

single family, then to a single nation. Under the last dispensa-
tion, it. is enjoined as a sacred duty to propagate it among all
mankind, and the church feels more and more every year her
obligation and ability to set up in all the earth, that kingdom,
which ^^ consists in righteousness and peace and joy in the
Holy Ghost."

Divine revelation was at first only a faint streak of light
glimmering in the East ; like the natural sun, it rose gradually
into view, till it became full orbed ; it has ever since been ris-
ing higher and higher above the obscurity of the horizon, and
breaking more and more through the mists and clouds of earth ;
in its meridian splendor, it will enlighten every land ; and it
will never decline from the zenith, but fade away in the bright-
er glories of the Lord God and the Lamb in their upper king-
dom. Such then is the law of God's universal government ;

" From seeming evil still educing good,
And better thence again and better still
In infinite progression.'^

There have been excepiuins to the law of progression in religion.
There were sad relapses among the Jews, and Christianity has
had its dark ages.

But even here the analogy holds. There have been excep-
tions to the progress of society. Society has bad its relapses
and its dark ages.

And there were exceptions to the law of progression in the
successive creative acts which geology discloses.* There was
a general advance from lower to higher grades of existence.
But occasionally more perfect organizations, both animal and
vegetable, are found to prevail vnth or even before^ the less
perfect. As if the Creator, while he usually proceeds accord^
ing to established rales, intended to show by occasionally de-
parting from them, that he is not necessitated to abide by those
rules.

It is worthy of a passing remark here, that in the develop-
ment of nature, providence and grace to the view and for the
benefit oimauj there is usually a progress or a relapse together.
Witness the dark ages, when the three kingdoms seemed to be
all shrouded in darluiess — when the light of natural science, of
social knowledge and virtue, and of spiritual wisdom seemed at

• Buckland, Chap. 13. p. J 15. London, 1836.
Vol. XIL No.31. 4

96 The Head of the Church, [Jui^r

once to have been extinguished. Look again at the reforma-
tion, when the eclipse passed off simultaneously from nature,
providence and grace, and they all shone out with unprecedent-
ed lustre. In our own day, it were difficult to say, whether
discoveries in nature, improvements in society, or the propaga-
tion of Christianity are advancing with the most rapid strides.

10. The types and prophecies of revelation are not without
analogy in nature and providence. That is, there is something
in the constitution and course of nature so analogous to the
typical and prophetic parts of the Bible, as to remove all a pri-
ori objections against them and even create a presumption in
their favor, vet not so nearly resembling them as to invalidate
their jrpecta/ sacredness — their peculiar claims to an immediate
divine origin.

As the former dispensation in religion was typical of the lat-
ter, so in the earlier stages of nature, there seems to be some-
thing like types of the later stages. The organs of the earlier
species of animals were comparatively rude and imperfect, yet
they were similar organs to those of the later species and per-
formed similar offices— K^ffices as similar as their situation and
circumstances would allow. The common mind would not
condemn it as a misnomer to call the forms and features of the
monkey types of human forms and features. The naturalist
finds such types * far down the scale, and far back in the his-
tory of animal life. It was this correspondence of parts through-
out the animal kingdom, which led Lamarck to broach the the-
ory, that all animals, including man, are but the same species,
having the same essential organs, but developing them more
fully and perfectly as time advances and circumstances become
more favorable. Though clearly false, the theory was founded
on indubitable and interesting facts. It is now settled, that the
animal species are radically and incommunicably distinct ; and
the resemblances in general organization between the earliest
ruder animals and the later and more perfect animals, result not
from natural propagation, and the favor of circumstances, but
from creative power exerted at successive periods and according
to such a law, as to constitute the first ages, '' shadows of
better things to come.''

* Type is the very word which naturalists have chosen to express
the analogy between the earlier and ruder organizations on the one
iuind, and the later and more perfect organizations on the other.

1838.] Head over aU TTiings. ^

Moreover as the rites and institutions of the former dispensa*
tion were not less wisely adapted to the character of the Israel-
ites and the then state of the world, than those of the latter
dispensation are to the present character and condition of man-
kind ; so the organization of the earlier animals was no less
wisely adapted to the then state of the earth's surface, than the
organization of the later animals is to its present state. Buck-
land discovers in the entombed remains of ■ the old wor^d, as
clear and beautiful marks of design and adaptation, as Paley
finds in the living world. Each religious dispensation was
perfect in its timey each grade of animal organization perfect in
its place.

In the developments of nature and providence to the age of
man, the past often contains something typical and almost pro-
phetic of the present and the present of the future. ^' Coming
events cast their shadows before," and seers of nature and
providence are raised up, who, though they " know not precise-
ly what, or what manner of time is signified," are yet enabled
to discern and predict in some measure what is to come. Such
seers were Burke and Adams,^ who foretold the issue of the
French and American revolutions ; and Newton and Leibnitz,
who had a glimpse, and threw out hints, of most subsequent
discoveries in natural science. Seneca foretold the discovery
of a new world,! and Socrates and Plato anticipated the advent
of a divine teacher, advising to forego the usual sacrifices till
such a teacher should come, and ^' representing with prophetic
sagacity and precision that he must be poor and void of all qual-
ifications but those of virtue alone, that a wicked world would
not hear his instructions and reproofs, and therefore in three or
four years after he began to preach, he would be persecuted,
imprisoned, scourged, and at last put to death.";!^ It cannot be
denied that great men have occasionally been endowed with a
peculiar gift of descrying future events and forewarning their

* The allusion is to a youthfiil letter of the elder Adams, which
paints the revolution and its issue with much truth and beauty.

f Venient annis saecula seris,
Qui bus Ocean us vincula rerum
Laxet, et ingens pateat tellus,
Tetbysque novos detegat orbes.

Seneeae Medea, 374—8.

I Bee Harris's Great Teacher, p. 50, where it is suggested, that 8oc«
rates and Plato enjoyed a degree of inspiration.

88 Th^ Head of the Church, [Juu

less gifted contemporaries of what they may hope or fear. Why
then should prophetic inspiration in the manner and degree, in
which it is claimed by some of the sacred writers, be thought a
thing so incredible a prioji, that no amount of evidence can en-
title it to credence ? The same God who endowed Newton
and Leibnitz, Adams and Burke, Seneca, Socrates and Plato
with sagacity and foresight so much above the mass of their con-
temporaries may have given, nay, has given to Isaiah and Jercr-
miah, Daniel and John a prophetic vision so much surpassing
the ken of these gifted minds, that every candid reader of their
predictions must acknowledge them to be divine.*

* I am aware that this analogy has been more frequently used,
(and therefore at first view may rather appear,) as an infidel objec-
tion, than as a confirmative argument to inspiration. One reason for
presenting it here« is a desire to exhibit it in a different aspect and
relation. It should be remembered, that an analogy is ''an agree-
ment or likeness between things in tome circumstances or efiTeets
when the things are o^n&if6 entirely different/* — [fTebster.) Pro-
phetic sagacity and prophetic inspiration ''agree" in so far that God
bestows peculiar gifts of foresight upon the possessors of both, yet
differ so much in the number and degree of the gift, that they can be
confounded only by a very stupid mind, or a very corrupt heart They
come under one very broad general principle of the divine adminis-
tration, so that the one serves to illustrate and confirm the other, but
the mode of the divine agency is so different in the two cases, as not to
invalidate the peculiar claim, and the sacred authority of inspiration.

It has K)een the belief of every nation in every age, that their great
men were inspired, and pagan nations have entertained views of the
nature and manner of inspiration strikingly analogous to those, which
the Bible authorizes. Infidels have urged this fact as a proo^ that
there is no such thing as real inspiration. But it proves the contraij,
just as the shadow, proves the existence of the substance and the
counterfeit shows the existence and the value of the genuine. It
shows, that Glod has laid a foundation for inspiration in the constitu-
tion of the human mind, upon which we should expect him to set up
a corresponding superstructure. If he intended to impart inspiration,
it would be wise to implant in man a preparation and an expectation
to receive it; and having implanted such an expectation, it were
strange indeed, if he shoulil never meet it

On this last topic, which I have introduced merely to illustrate my
design in the text, see Knapp's Tbeol. Art. I. § 9. Most of the ob-
jections of infidels, when' rightly understood, are really arguments In
favor of Christianity ; and instead of shrinking from the view of them
ouiaelves and endeavoring to keep them out of sight of others, we
should lay hold of them und turn them against iufidelity.

1838.] Head over aU I%ing$. 29

11* In the universal law of progression, of which I have spo-
ken, the earlier stages are preparatory to tbe latter stages, and the
latter reap most of the advantages of the former together with
many peculiar advantages. This b obviously true in the king-
dom of grace. The patriarchal dispensation «was introductory
to the Mosaic, and the Mosaic preparatory to the Christian ;
while the Christian, with all tbe benefits of former dispensations,
combines many advantages peculiar to itself. The Israelites
lived not for themselves, but to be examples unto us ; and their
history was written " for our admonition, on whom the ends of
the world are come." We have the accumulated wisdom and
experience of the church in all past ages to guide us in the man-
agement of ecclesiastical afiairs and in the discbarge of our re-
ligious duties.

So it is in society. The progress of society is owing in no
small degree to the wisdom derived directly or indirectly from
past ages. The Grecian and Roman republics were constitu-
ted and administered not for themselves only, but for the instruc-
tion and benefit of all subsequent republics. All the despotisms
and limited governments of the Old world have risen or fallen,
maintained their institutions or modified their policy, for the
benefit of the New, whither light fit)m every quarter and every
age has converged. All that have lived before us, have lived
for our adnoonition, on whom the ends of the social and political
world are come.

It is so in nature also. Ever since man was placed on the
earth, its surface has been undergoing changes, all preparatory
to the present state of things — all conducive to the support and
comfort of its present increased and increasing population. Our
alluvial meadows and extending deltas, our beds of peat and
bog iron, our collections of vegetable mould and indeed all our
existing soils are the gradually accumulated resources of suc-
cessive generations. And if the conclusions of geology are not
to be set aside, a similar process of preparation and accumula-
tion for the benefit of man was going on for ages previous to his
existence. The whole of the earth's surface* is a spacious
storehouse of relics and treasures, which have been collecting
in all past times to supply and enrich mankind in time of need>

* ''No small part of the present surface of the earth is derived from
the remains of animals, that constituted the population of ancient
BtasJ'^BuckiaiuL

80 7%e Head of the Chuteh, [Jult

just as society and the church at the present time are built upon
the ruins of other churches and societies^ instructed by their ex-
perience and enriched by their remains. We draw our fuel
and our food, our comforts and. our delicacies from the remains
of vegetable and animal life* in former ages ; and as the matter,
which constitutes the bodies of the present generation once en-
tered into the constitution of other bodies, so the opinions and
feelings of our minds are the opinions and feelings of other minds
modified by constitutional idiosyncrasies, improved by experi-
ence and enlarged by the accumulations of time and the favor
of circumstances. It seems to be a law of the natural and the
moral world, that man shall grow only by living upon the re-
lies of his predecessors, rise only by standing upon the tombs
of his fathers, extend his vision only by looking from the mon-
uments of the mighty dead. Dissolution is going on every-
where in our world, but it is everywhere preparatory to another
and a better organization. One race of animals is destroyed,
and a more perfect race succeeds them. One generation of
men goeth and a wiser and better generation cometh in their
stead. Society and the church are perpetuated and improved
by the very processes of disruption, which seem to threaten
their annihilation. Death bears a most important and wonder-
ful part in the whole economy of vegetable, animal, social and
spiritual life. The plant decays in the autumn and lies down
in a wintry grave, only to revive in all the freshness and gaiety
of spring. The insect becomes its own winding sheet, and then
unconscious awaits a resurrection to a higher order of existence.
The nation declines and falls, to rise again under a better form
and happier auspices, and to attain to a higher degree of social
perfection. Theliumanl)ody " is sown in corruption, to be rais-
ed in jncorruption — it is sown in dishonor, to be raised in glo-
ry."t The soul, like the butterfly (which in the Greek lan-
guage— the language alike of nature, of philosophy and of reve-

* " At the sight of a spectacle so imposing, so terrible, as that of the
wreck of animal life, forming almost the entire soil on which wo
tread, it is diflicult to restrain the imagination from hazarding some
conjectures as to the causes, by which such great effects have been
produced." — Cumtr.

f In view of the analogies to the resurrection, with which^ nature is
so replete, no wonder that Clement, th« apostolic father, exclaimed :
^ Consider, my beloved, how the Lord shows us our future resurrec-
tion perpetually S"

1838.] Head over aU Tkif^t, 81

ktioD — ^has the same name,*) drops its clayey chrysalis to
spread its pinions in a purer atmosphere, and bask in the bright-
er sunshine of a celestial day. The natural world, like the
fabled phenix, its allegorical representative, will one day rise
from its own ashes and wear a new drapery of beauty and glo-
ry .f And the church, the city of the living God on earth, will
be dissolved only to be built again into the New Jerusalem, the
capital city of the new heavens and new earth, whose walls
will be precious stones, its gates pearls, its streets pure gold,
and the Lord God and the Lamb the temple and the light
thereof.

12. After our Saviour had manifested his creative power by
feeding a great multitude with a few loaves and fishes, he show-
ed his economical wisdom by saying, '^ gather up the fragments
which remain, that nothing be lost." The same blending of
these apparently incongruous attributes is conspicuous in all
the works of God. Nothing can transcend his power, when he
sees fit to exert it, and nothing can exceed his economy, when
the exercise of power is unnecessary. He creates nothing to be
lost, provides nothing to be wasted, gives nothing that need not
be given. He might have created fertile soils at once, and pro-
vided fuel as it was needed, but he chose by a natural and
gradual process to collect them as they were not wanted and
preserve them till they were. He might have made a plenti-
ful deposit of useful minerals and precious ores on every farm,
but he has chosen to scatter them in veins or beds beneath the
surface of the earth, and employ our skill and energy to dis-
cover and procure them. He might have revealed the natural
history of the primeval earth to us in his word, but he chose
not to reveal what we might better discover for ourselves, and
he has left us to gather that history from the organic remains of
primitive ages.

In his providence, God might have led every age and coun-
try to make its own inventions and discoveries and improve-
ments, but he has chosen the more economical course of trans-
mitting them from one age and country to another. And he

* 9^ii!n> the name at once of the soul and of the butterfly — its image.

t 2 Pet. 3: 12, 13. This doctrine of revelation is confirmed by
natural science— -by the philosophy of cause and effect, no leas than
the philosophy of analogy.

88 The Head of the Church, [July

has suffered nothing truly valuable * to be lost. We often think
and regret, that important knowledge has perished forever, but
in process of time it proves to have been unimportant, or it is
revived just at the time, when it is most needed, and in just such
a way, as to render it most curious, interesting and valuable.

In like manner, God might have communicated a distinct
revelation to every people of every generation. But what it
was man's power and privilege to do, he has left him to do,
and made it his duty to collect the scattered portions of re-
vealed truth, promulgate them to all nations, and transmit them
to the end of-the world. He has communicated barely what it
was needful for man to know, and what he could not learn from
reason and experience, and of all that has been revealed^ there
is no evidence, that any thing has been lost.

Thus in all his works, God does all that is necessary, how-
ever much it may cost, and nothing that is superfluous, however
easy it might be — gives nothing that is not valuable, and su^rs
nothing that is truly valuable to be irrecoverably lost.

13. Another analogy, which forces itself upon our attention
as pervading the divine works, is an obvious disregard of human
distinctions — i. e. such distinctions of time, space, rank, etc. as
men are wont to deem important.

We who are of yesterday and die to-morrow, and are subject
to incessant changes and vicissitudes from the day of our birth
to the day of our death, attach great importance to the distinc-
tion of time. But in the sight of him, who is the same yester-'
day, to-day and forever, '^ a thousand years are as one day, and
one day as a thousand years." Accordingly men are hurried
and fretful in their proceedings, impatient of delay, and ever
hastening to the issue. But the divine plan of operations is
calm, gradual and deliberate ; and though in some of its stages,
it may appear imperfect or unwise, it will ultimately prove to
have originated and advanced in perfect wisdom.

The divine, untaught in science, looks upon the geological
theory of the earth's existence for indefinitely long periods be-
fore the creation of man, and exclaims : '^ How absunl ! What !
the earth tens of thousands of years in a fluid state — a state of
ignition even, devoid of living beings or inhabited only by sala-
manders ! And hundreds of thousands of years more, entirely
I ■■ — --.. .- . .._■

* Perhaps I should have said nothing 6flBential--4i€ithiiig wboae
place cannot be otherwise supplied.

1838.] Head over all Things. 33

or chiefly covered with water, devoted to the formation of
limestone and coral beds, and inhabited only by polypes and
lizards and alligators, et id omne genus ! For ages without any
inhabitants, and for myriads of ages, inhabited only by irrational
and hateful animals without any intelligent lord ! Who can be-
lieve that the Creator was guilty of such weakness and folly !*

On the other hand, the infidel geologist looks upon the
theological doctrine of the slowly successive periods of revela-
tion, and the protracted delay of the work of redemption with
like incredulity and amazement. " What !'' he exclaims, '^ hun-
dreds of generations of immortal beings suffered to live and
die in ignorance of God and a future state, and that God i:e-
vealed to them for the fii'st time in flaming fire, and that future
state disclosed only to their agonized sensibilities and their
hopeless, endless despair ! The only possible scheme of human
salvation delayed in its execution for 4000 years, and for 2000
years longer promulgated only to a small minority of the
human family ! Who dare utter or believe such a libel on the
wisdom and goodness of God !"

Now both these objections spring from ignorance and narrow
views. The divine, untaught in science, and the geologist,
ignorant of revelation, both see, that in some of his works God
disregards those distinctions of time, to which we attach so
much importance ; while they both deny that he acts on the
same principle in his other works ! But the principle is univer-
sal. Revelation lays it down as a general principle, that in
his sight, " one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years
as one day ;^' and reason would lead us to expect, that the
infinite and eternal God would not view time as it appears
to us.f

So also the distinction of space and rank, are disregarded by

* Is it any less difficult to believe, that the universe was a blank
for eternal ages before a single creature existed? Yet so it must have
been, unless creatures have existed from eternity. Capt. Symmes
argued, that the earth is hollow, because it was absurd to suppose
God would occupy so much space with mere inert matter !

f The man, who is neither a divine nor a naturalist, (shall I add
neither a Christian, nor a scholar,) is the only roan who can consist-
ently urge either of the objections specified in the text. He must
give up all claim to consistency, who professes to be either, and yet
does not admit, that the same objection which he urges against bis
antagonist, is equally valid against himself.

Vol. XII. No. 31. 5

34 TTie Heai of the Churchy [Jult

him, who pervadeth alike the atom and the universe, and to
whom the loftiest and the lowest of his creatares, are alike less
than nothing and vanity. The sceptical philosopher declares
it to be unreasonable and incredible, that the God who makes,
and sustains, and governs an in6nitude of worlds, should so
concern himself with our little world, as to give his Son to die
for its redemption ; and still more improbable that he would
condescend to such a concern for obscure individuals, as is im-
plied in the doctrines of a particular providence, personal elec^
tion, and the indwelling of the spirit.

The illiterate Christian, on the other hand, cannot believe
that there are many hundreds of shells once enshrining living
animals in a grain of limestone,* and myriads of animalcules in
a single drop of water.f And many an educated Christian
thinks it beneath the Almighty to people a world with polypes,
and muscles, and snails, and alligators, and lizards, etc. etc.

But he has given up two thirds of the earth's surface to the
fishes and monsters of the deep, and peopled a large portion of
the land with lizards, and serpents, and vermin ; and may he
not have left the whole earth for a time, without an intelligent
lord, to be overrun with inferior animak, animals, which we in
our reasoning, yet erring pride, are prone to despise ? He has
created infinitely more animalcules than larger animals, and
may not he, who creates them, redeem man 7 He does form
and feed sumptuously every day the snail, and lizard, and ser-
pent, so loathsome and odious to usy though not to Am ; and
may he not elect, and dwell with, and provide for the humble
Christian, number the very hairs of his bead, and cause all
things to work together for his good ?

These things are all true, and all spring from the same
general principle in the divine government, such a disregard for
the distinctions of space and rank, as leads him to lavish his
bounty and his grace on places and creatures, which seem too
minute to deserve the attention of the great Sovereign of the
universe. " If there be one thing" says an eminent naturalist,

* ** Soldani collected fi'om less than au ounce and a half of stone
found in the hills of Casclana, in Tuscany, 10,454 microscopic cham-
bered shells. Of one species of these shells, he calculates, that a
thousand individuals would scarcely weigh one grain." — BudtUind^
p. 117.

t ** Hundreds of thousands (of the sufusoria) may be seen in a
nngle drop of watei." — Kirby^s BridgewaUr TVecrftVe.

1838.] Head aver aU TTiingi. 85

** more surprisiDg than another in the investi^uon of natural
phenomena^ it is perhaps the infinite extent and vast importance
of things apparently little and insignificant."* What intelligent
reader of the Bible, and of the history of the church, can avoid
seeing, that the same characteristic feature pervades the spirit-
ual world from the fall of man in Eden to bis complete restora-
tion and final confirmation in the Celestial Paradise !

14. The same end is sought in each of the three kingdoms,
viz. the highest happiness of the creature, and the glory of the
Creator.

The God of the Bible appeals to his chosen people of old, to
say, what more he could have done for them, than he bad
done ; and in the gift of his Son, he makes the same apj!>eal to
Christians in the melting eloquence of that tone, which lan-
guage cannot express.

The God of nature manifests a like intention, an effort, so )o
speak, to secure the utmost amount of happiness. Every ele-
ment teems with animal life — every spot is replete with bappy
existence. The desert air swarms with insects ; the wilderness
and the solitary place are full of inhabitants suited to the
locality.

^' So is the great and wide sea, wherein are things creeping
innumerable, both great and small beasts." The sea is as amply
furnished with vegetables,f and the larger animals, as the land ;
while the drops of tlie former like the particles of the latter are
densely peopled with animalcules.^ To multiply happy ex-
istence still more, thousands of animals, beyond the number
which the vegetable world is capable of sustaining, subsist by
preying upon others ; and the very carcasses of animals, that
die a natural death, furnish food for a numerous army of
scavengers, which, while in the act of providing a suitable diet

* So also Pliny : See his tarn parvis, atque tarn nuUiB^ quae aultis,
quanta vis, quam inextricabilis perfectis.

f Marine, like land animals, depend upon the vegetable kingdom
for subsistence, and Brongniart has shown that the existing submarine
vegetation seems to admit of these great divisions which characterize
to a certain dejrree, the plants of the frigid, temperate and torrid
zones. — Stt Buekland, p. 451.

t The powers of reproduction in the Infusonia are such, that from
. one individual, a million were produced in ten days; on the eleventh
day four millions, and on the twelfth, sixteen millions. — Buckiand on
ihi aiUhoriiy ^ Eh$enherg

36 The Head of the Ckurch, [July

for themselves, remove what would otherwise prove a source
of annoyance and disease to other animals."*

And the modes and forms of animal existence are not more
multiplied and varied, than are the contrivances to render life
happy. Natural history is little else than an enumeration of
manifest proof, that the character of the Deity is wisdom and
goodness, and the end, at which he aims, is the happiness of
bis creatures.

And the history of (jod's dealings with man, teaches, as a
whole, the same lesson. Every organ of his frame, every ele-
ment in his constitution, every event in his life is designed and
adapted to promote his happiness. If he abused no part of his
original constitution, and perverted no bounty of providence or
gift of grace, he would be entirely happy ; and the miseries he
suffers, are intended to secure his ultimate highest happiness by
reclaiming him from past, and deterring him from future abuses
and perversion. Moral beings can be happy only by being
virtuous and holy, and all the provisions of providence and
of grace, are directed towards the great object of making them
happy in that way. For this object, God inflicts natural and
providential evils. For this object, he subjected his beloved
Son to untold agonies. For this object, in part at least, he will
punish forever the incorrigible sinner. And I know not how

* "No sooner is the signal given, on the death of any large animal,
than multitudes of every class hasten to the spot, eager to partake of
the repast, which nature has prepared. If the carcass he not rapidly
devoured by rapacious birds, or carniverous quadrupeds, it never fails
to be soon attacked by swarms of insects, which speedily consume its
softer textures, leaving only the bones. So strongly was Linnaeus
impressed with the immensity of the scale, on which these works of
demolition by insects are carried on in nature, that he used to main-
tain, that the carcase of a dead horse, would not be devoured with
the same celerity by a lion, as it would by these flesh flies (Muscu
vomitoria ) and their immediate pro^ny ; for it is known t^iat one
female will give birth to at least 20,000 young larvae, each of which
will in the course of one day devour ho much food and grow so
rapidly as to require an increase of 200 times its weight ; and a few
days are sufficient to the production of a third generation. The very
bones are the favorite food of the hyena, whose powerfiil jaws are
peculiarly formed for grinding thoin into powder, and whose stomach
can extract from tlieiri an abundant portion of nutriment. No less
speedy is the work of demolition among the inhabitants of the
wtterF, etc." — Set RodgeVs Bridgewater Treatise, Vol. 2, p. 49.

1838.] Htad over cM !Z%«itg». 37

a Being of iafinite benevolence, would exhibit more convincing
and affecting proofs of his regard for the highest happiness of
the universe, than in the very pains, which he inflicts so un-
willingly upon the children of men, and the agonies, which he
laid upon his beloved Son, for the sake of securing a higher
degree of happiness on a larger scale.

The highest possible amount of happiness, is also the aim and
tendency of that universal law of progression, which we have
already considered. An infinite progression of goodness and
happiness, will produce a greater sum total, than any changeless
state, however exalted ; just as the sum of any progressive
infinite series in mathematics, however small the first term, is
greater than the sum of any unchanging infinite series, how-
ever large the fixed term may be. How delightful it is to the
enlarged and benevolent mind, to contemplate the onward and
upward progress of a holy and happy universe through infinity !
Who can sum up that progression ! Who can grasp, even in
imagination, such an aggregate of excellence and bliss ! Oh,
they know little of God, who deny his benevolence, little of
bis universe, who think it not made to be a happy universe !

With the happiness of the creature, the glory of the Creator
is associated, as the end of all his works. That glory consists
in the display of his glorious attributes, and the exhibition of
those attributes, is manifestly a chief end of nature, providence,
and grace.

Is the natural creation a display of his power ? So is the
new spiritual creation.* Does the system of nature illustrate
his wisdom ? The plan of redemption illustrates it more.f Is
the goodness of God conspicuous in his works of creation ? It
is not less conspicuous in his works of providence and grace. Is
his terrible and resistless justice set forth in his providential dis-
pensations ? These exhibitions of his displeasure at sin, are pre-
monitions of that great day revealed in the Scriptures, when he
will judge the world in righteousness. Is the uniformity of na-
ture's laws and operations, a standing monument of his truth
and fidelity to his promises ? The prophecies fulfilled and ful-
filling, the promises and ihreatenings of his word executed,, like-
wise shows his voracity .J He is at once the author, the sub-

• Eph. 1: 19. Pfl. 110: 3. t Epb. 3: 10.

X This analogy is often adverted to in the Scriptures. Pa. 119: 89,
90. Matt. 5: 18.

38 7^ Head of the Oiurck, [Jult

ject, and the object or end of the book of nature, the book of
providence, and the book of grace. All his works are dedica-
ted to himself — to what other being could they with propriety
have been dedicated ? They treat of himself, the greatest and
best subject. They speak of him consistently and harmonious-
ly. One book may speak more of his natural, and another,
more of his moral attributes. One may treat of some particu-
lar topics which are omitted in another, or may discourse of the
same topics more clearly and fully ; but God is the sum and
substance of them all, his character their subject, and his glory,
their end. ^^ All his works praise him, and all bis saints bless
him^" In nature, the heavens declare his glory, and the firma-
ment showeth his handy work. In providence, day unto day
uttereth speech, and night unto night showeth knowledge
of him. And the great end, for which the church is es-
tablished, is to show forth the praises of him, who called its
members out of darkness, into his marvellous light. Every
thing animate and inanimate, voluntarily and involuntarily, re-
sponds to the call of the ^^ sweet singer of Israel :" '^ prabe ye
the Lord;" and the student of nature, and the observer of
providence, may unite with the Apocalyptic seer, and say :
Every creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under
the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them,
heard I saying, Blessing, and honor, and glory, and power, be
unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb,
forever and ever.

I might specify other analogies. I might adduce the inti-
mate analogy between the doctrine of social liabilities in this
life, wiih which nobody thinks of finding any fault, and the pro-
per doctrine of the imputation of Adam's sin, and of Christ's
righteousness, of which multitudes complain ; in other words,
the analogy between what we actually sufiTer and enjoy in con-
sequence of our involuntary connection with others in this life,
and what we are alleged in the Scriptures to suffer and enjoy,
in consequence of the constituted connection between us, and
the first and second Adam. I might speak of that unifonnity
amid variety, which forms so characteristic and interesting a
feature both in the constitution and course of nature, and in the
composition and operation of the Bible — which pervades the
vegetable, animal, and spiritual kingdoms, the forms and features
of mankind, their languages and social institutions, and their
moral and religious characters. I might advert to that happy

1838.] Head aver all Thtngi. 89

blending of beauty with utility, which constitutes a striking
analogy between the divine works and the divine word ; in the
former of which natural religion joins hands with the music and
poetry of nature, while in the latter, revealed religion is " wed-
ded to immortal verse." I might mention that simplicity of
means, which exalts the divine wisdom so far above all human
'skill, and which is so well expressed in those oft cited lines,

'* In human works, tho* labored on with pain,
A thousand movements scarce one object gain.
In God's, one single can its end produce,
Yet seems to second, too, some other use.

But why should 1 specify. The whole natural world in its
constitution and laws, its particular and aggregate, is a counter-
part of the spiritual world.* Every object in the former, is a
kind of image or type of something in the latter. Nature is a
preliminary dispensation, like the Mosaic, true and holy so far
as it goes, insufficient by itself, imperfectly understood without
a further revelation, but when thus understood, illustrating and
confirming the Christian dispensation. The temple of nature^
like Solomon's temple, is full of types and shadows of heavenly
things, though the " candlestick" of Christianity must be lighted
up in it, before they become distinctly visible. Have not the
flowers a language, and the brutes a voice, to teach us the do-
mestic, the social, the Christian virtues ?f Read Pollok's de*
scripiion of nature's preaching.

^ The seasons came and went, and went and came,
To teach men gratitude, and, as they passed,
Gave warning of the laspe of time, that else
Had stolen unheeded by. The gentle flowers
Retired, and stooping o'er the wilderness,
Talked of humility and peace and love.
The dews came down unseen at eventide,
And silently their bounty shed, to teach
Mankind unostentatious charity."

Read this, and much more of the like nature in the context^

* The writer does not mean to countenance the mysticism of the
Hutchinsonians, or the subtile speculations of the Platonists, but sim-
ply to present the external world in that intimate relation to the spirit-
ual world, which it sustained in the mind of the sacred wtiters, who
certainly saw every where marks of the divine presence, and emblems
of heavenly things.

t Matt: 6: 96^-30. Prov. 6: 6—6. 90: 24--38. Isa. 1:^

40 TTie Head of the Church, [Jult

and say, whether it is all poetry, or whether the objects of
nature, and the events of providence do in truth teach us lessons
of spiritual wisdom. Follow, above all, in the train of our
Saviour, and as he utters his parables, and delivers his sermons,
see all nature a picture-gallery filled with likenesses and sketches
of heavenly things. Indeed it is a striking characteristic of all
the sacred writers, that they find memorials, and types of God .
and heaven in every natural object and event ; and the allego-
ries, the similes, all the figurative language of the Bible, is a
standing illustration of the analogies that pervade the realms of
nature, providence and grace.

Now I need not spend time in establishing the inference
from these numerous and striking analogies, that the realms in
which they prevail, have the same head. When we see
similar laws administered in a similar manner, in different
provinces, and the same characteristic features prevailing, with
only those differences which diverse circumstances require, we
infer that they are under the same government. The same
striking and characteristic peculiarities of sentiment, style and
imagery, prove the books in which they are found, to have the
same author. When I apply these principles to the present
subject of discussion, I am constrained to believe that nature,
providence, and grace, are provinces governed by the same
head, books written by the same great author. I would as
soon believe that man administers the providential government
of the world, as that he devised and established the church ;
and when I come to the conclusion that man made the heavens
and the earth, then I may be ready to believe that unaided man
was the author of the Bible.

A few remarks, which are suggested by the foregoing dis-
cussion, but could not conveniently find a place in it, will close
this protracted article.

1 . Analogy affords us the best means of answering objections
both against science and religion. The scientific man has few
objections to urge against religion, which do not lie with equal
force against nature and providence ; and the religious man has
few objections to urge against science, which if valid at all,
would not be equally valid against religion. Press hence upon
both the analogy, and if you do not convince, you will silence.
Does the philosopher object to the theological doctrine of divine
sovereignty ? Show him, that the same doctrine is written on
every page of nature and providence. Does the theologian

1838.] Head over all IMngs. 41

charge with absurdity the prolonged jprocesses and protracted
periods of Geology ? Point him to the fact, that his own science
and his own sacred books disclose similar processes and periods.
Does the skeptic scout the idea> that eternal life is suspended
on so pusillanimous a trait as humility, and so involuntary a
principle as faith ? Show him, that the requirement of these
virtues, so far from being arbitrary, accords with the nature of
things, and that the knowledge and happiness of this life are
suspended on the exercise of the same virtues. Does the
Christian doubt, whether God would condescend to create
myriads of infusories in a drop of water, or people a world with
successive generations of irrational creatures ? Remind him that
God has condescended to provide for, and . redeem a world of
sinners, *^ whose foundation is in the dust, who are crushed
before the moth, and who are accounted to him as less than
nothing and vanity." Does the fatalist pretend, that his ex-
ertions for salvation are rendered fruitless by the immutable
purposes and laws of God ? Tell him, that he would not for a
moment stake any temporal good on the principle of that ob-
jection, though all temporal good is equally dependent on im-
mutable laws and purposes. In like manner, we may answer
almost every objection of the scholar against the Christian, of
the Christian against the scholar, and of the man, that shows
any common sense about any thing, against both the scholar
and the Christian. He must either be a perfect model of con-
sistency, or make no pretensions to it; in other words, he must
be either an angel or a fodl, whose errors cannot be corrected
by analogy. If ministers would employ evangelical reasoning
more, and abstract reasoning less, they would be more successful
in conciliating practical and hurtful error. On the other hand,
why need they forget, that analogy is not more truly a ^' power-
ful engine" than an impartial one, which if not applied by
thetnselves to the correction of their own errors, will be wielded
against them by others to their no small discredit, if not their
utter discomfiture.

2. It is very important, that the teacher of religion, and quite
desirable, that the private Christian, should be a student of
nature and an observer of providence. Besides silencing ob-

{'ectors and confirming his own faith, he would thus find fresh
ight and beauty shed upon the truths of religion. Nature and
salvation are parallel columns in God's universal harmony, and
• Vol. XII. No. 31. 6

43 The Head of the Glktcrdl, [Jvlt

providence is a divine commentary upon tbem both. Should
they not be studied together ?

Coleridge somewhere remarks,* that he admired Shak-
speare's wisdom and power on a first perusal in his youth, and
on reading him a second time after years of study and improve-
ment, Shakspeare's wisdom and power appeared to have in*
creased quite as much as his own. This remark is far more
applicable to God's works, than to those of any mortal. The
more wisdom and power we bring to the study of them, the
more we discover in them. Each increase of the magnifying
power of the telescope, is attended with a corresponding
accession to the extent, beauty, and grandeur of the visible
universe. Every improvement of the microscope discloses new
beings, new wonders, new and more delicate strokes of a divine
artist. The observer's mental vision too is improved, not to
reach the full height, nor penetrate the whole depth, nor range
all the compass of nature's mysteries, but while he solves one
of these mysteries, to discover more than one, which he leaves
unsolved. So that the Philosopher, who now looks out upon
the divine works from the highest vantage ground, with the
most acute and profound mind and the most perfect helps to his
ocular and mental vision, may well feel, as did the immortal
Newton, that he has scarcely glanced along the shore, and dis«
covered a few beautiful shells ; 'while before him spreads the
unexplored and illimitable ocean of truth.

The Bible is also boundless in the compass of its truths,
exhaustless in its treasures and beauties. Its contents seem to
enlarge in extent, and magnify in importance, and increase in
variety and iacerest in precise proportion to the progress of
society, and the improvement of the individual reader. So that
the Christian, who knows the most, not only sees the most to
admire in what he has read, but expects to find the most, that
is new and admirable in his future study of the sacred volume ;
and so far from ever feeling that he has comprehended its
whole scope, or exhausted all its riches, he will be ready to ex-
claim, ^^ it is high as heaven, what canst thou do; it is deeper
than hell, what canst thou know ; the measure thereof is longer
than the earth and broader than the sea."

Now if knowledge of every sort is a help to the acquisition
of fiirther knowledge, (and it is, for every truth stands more or

* I give only the substance of the remark from memory .

1888.] Head aver aU Thing$. 43

1688 related to every other trutb,^ a portion of the knowledge
of one class of God's works, will help us to acquire a knowl-
edge of another class. Familiarity with one of Shakspeare's
dramatic pieces helps to understand and appreciate another.
The student, who has mastered one production of a classw
author, will master another production of the same author at
once more easily and more perfectly. Why should not this

Erinciple apply to the different productions of the Divine mind ?
[as it not been so in the past study of the Divine works? It*
was the knowledge and Influence of the Bible, that gave the
first impulse and the first clue to the discovery in natural
science ; and firesh discoveries in natural science are ever im-*
pelling and guiding in the study of the Bible, explaining many
particular passages, and correcting in general wrong modes of
mquiry.

What new grandeur and glory pervade the universe, when
viewed in the light of the Bible, as created, pervaded and con-
trolled by one Omnipotent, omniscient, Almighty and all-wise
Spirit ! Others may prefer the theogonies and cosmogonies of
pagan Greece and Rome, and sigh for the hills, the fountains
and the groves, the muses, the Naiads, and the Nymphs of
those classic lands, but,

*" SioD hill
Delights me .more, and Siloa^s brook, that flowed
Fast by the Oracle of God ;"

and,

" Tbe heavenly muse, that on the sacred top
Of Oreb or of Sinai did inspire
That Shepherd, who first taught the choeen aeed,
In the beginning, how the heavens and earth
Rose out of Chaos ;

And chiefly that Great Spirit, who doth prefer
Before all temples the upright heart and pure.^
Hence is to be drawn the inspiration of** adventrous song
That with no middle flight will surely soar
Above the Aorian mount, while it pursues
Things unatte^npted yet in prose or verse."

The classics contaia^xquisite poetry, but the Bible surpasses
them in exquisite poetry, I had almost said as much as in pure
morality and sound philosophy. Nature is grand and beautiful
and instinct with life, as pourtrayed on the classic page. But

44 T^e Head of the Ckwch, [Jult

the universe, as seen in the light of revelation, is more beautiful
and grand, animated by a purer, and loftier Spirit, and lighted
up with a brighter, diviner radiance.

On the other hand, how has science shed light upon the
Bible ! With what new interest have modern discoveries in-
vested such passages of Scripture, as the first chapter of Gene-
sis, fortieth of Isaiah, and the eighth Psalm. The modem As-
tronomer, any enlightened Christian of these days, seea a
* beauty and sublimity beyond the conceptions, may I not say,
of David and Isaiah themselves in such descriptions as these :
" When 1 consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the
moon and the stars which thou hast ordained ; what is man that
thou art mindful of him, or the Son of man, that thou visitest
him." " Who hath measured the waters in the hollow of his
hand, and meted out heaven with the span and comprehended
the dust of the earth in a n^asure. All nations before him are
as nothing, and are counted to him less than nothin^and vanity."
All such descriptions, all the illustrations of the divine wisdom
and goodness in the Bible, will be enhanced in beauty and sub-
limity and impressiveness in exact proportion to our increasing
knowledge of the divine works. A perfect system of mental
science, should such a system ever be discovered, would proba-
bly add to the clearness, with which we understand, and the
power, with which we realize divine truths, no less than the
discoveries in natural science have already done. So far then
fix)m being alarmed at the progressive influence (^science upon
religion, it is with emotions of delight too big for utterance, that
I look down the tract of time and see with the eye of faith
science and religion pouring a flood of light upon each other ;
seal after seal broken, and page after page of surpassing beauty
and glory opened to view simultaneously in nature and revela-
tion ; doubts removed and mysteries explained ; the elements
conquered, and the passions subdued ; man reclaimed, and God
honored ; and the world at length irradiated with the blended
beams of a sanctified literature and an enKgbtened Christianity.
To the men of that happy day, " heaven alone will indeed be
but a reward for heaven enjoyed below." To behold the
dawning of that day, and pray and labor for its approaching
consummation, is a privilege, which prophets and kings of
former limes never enjoyed.

3. It is the duty and the interest of every man to fall in with
the analogies — ^ihe harmonious arrangements— of nature, provi-

1838.] Bead aver aU Thingi. 45

dence and grace. Take an illustration of mj meaning. It has
been already observed, that nature, providence and grace in
their development to man usually advance togetb)er, and that all'
are making simultaneous and gigantic strides in our own day.
It becomes us then to notice the point towards which they con*
verge, the end to which they are advancing. Do I mistake in
saying, it is the conversion of the world ? See in heathen lands
walls of prejudice and caste and despotic power, high as heaven
and hard as adamant, prostrated to make way for the Gospel ;
see at the same time in christian lands resources accumulated
in the hands of benevolent men, associations formed on the
broad scale and in the enlarged spirit of universal diristian
philanthrophy, means of conveyance improved, langauges mas-
tered, rags converted into Bibles, sailors into missionaries, and
the elements into winged messengers — ^all united to convey the
Gospel to the ends of the earth ; and even if you did not see
the church awakened to an unprecedented interest in this spe-
cific object, could you doubt, that the era for the world's con-
version is approaching ? And is it safe for you to oppose, is it
wise for you to neglect, are you willing to stand aloof from an
enterprise, which nature, providence and grace are cooperating
to achieve ?

The same questions, or similar questions may be asked res-
pecting most of the analogies and divine arrangements, which
ve have been considering.

Humility and faith, sustain the same important relation to the
kingdom of nature, the kingdom of providence and the kingdom
of grace — they are necessary and profitable for all things, hav-
ing the promise of the life that now is, and also of that which is
to come. Is it then consistent with your duty and interest to
denounce the one as a mark of meanness, and the other as an
arbitrary requirement ?

To cooperate with God is the highest honor to which man can
aspire — to resemble God, the highest perfection to which he can
attain. Instead of finding fault then, with that arrangement
which requires a union of divine and human agency in every
important concern, we should humbly and gratefully acknowl-
edge the condescension and love of God in permitting us to co-
operate with him in his benevolent designs, and be equally
ready to avail ourselves of his gracious aid, and render to him
our poor but faithful and devoted service.

While we fall in so far as possible with his plan of operations,

46 The Head of the Oturch, etc. [Jclt

ive should endeavor to act ever on general principles, to be
guided by general laws, and to render to them as uniform and
complete obedience as if they were self-executing.

Though we have no right to do evil, that good may come,
we may strive to resemble God, and rejoice that we live in a
world, where we can resemble him, and cooperate with him, in
bringing good out of evil, order out of confusion, and light out
of darkness.

So long as we do our duty, we should not allow our faith to
be shaken or our fedings to be greatly disturbed by the slow
process of human amelioration on the one hand, or the sudden
aqd violent revolutions that may qpcur on the other, but should
be ^' steadfast, immoveable, always abounding in the work of
the Lord," following the leadings of Providence, promoting in
God's wise manner, God^s holy and benevolent end, the pro-
gress of ourselves and others in knowledge and virtue, the high-
est happiness of the creature and the greatest glory of the
Creator.

To return from these particular illustrations to the general
principle of this head. . The laws of nature, providence and
grace, are all laws of God, all alike obligatory, and all clothed
with the same sacred authority. ^' He that ofiendetb in one
point is guilty of all." He that wittingly violated one of the
codes, arrays them all against him. But he who obeys them
all, will find that they conspire most happily to aid each other,
and to bestow a great reward. It is not enough to obey only
the natural, or the providential, or the moral laws. Duty is
fulfilled, happiness is secured, by universal and perfect obedience.
He onlv is an educated man, who has been trained to the ut-
most oi his ability to *^ discover, apply and obey all the laws,
by which God governs the universe." He, who has been thus
trained in the school of nature, the school of providence, and the
school of griaice, he is an educated man, educated for time and
for eternity^ educated for earth and educated for heaven.
Whether he is engaged in temporal or spiritual concerns,
whether he undertakes to reform men in this world, or prepare
them for the next, he will not go against wind, tide and current,
but he will do it in the way of divine appointment, in accord-
ance with all the divine laws and with the harmonious coopera-
tion of all the divine attributes.

Ibod.j 'I'keology of Socrates* 4kl

ARTICLE III.

Tbe Theology of Socrates, from Xenophon's

Memorabilia.

Tranilated rrom Bchw«ighaaaer't Oputcula Academiea, by F. H. Hnbbard, Teaeb«r of a

Clastieal Sehool, Boaton.

6at^S», oiscj; rnnk inda&^iffttv ^A&rpffuoh ^wt^ivrip ntoi jovg ^tcvg
fail awpgopHP, %hv aae^ig fth ovdiy noiB ntql tov( ^soifg ovi iUKona^
ovx% nqdlartOj toiavia di xal liyoma *al n^artorta ntgl ^b&p, oki ttg
cry ual Xiymp xal ngdnnp diti %» xal voidCoixo ticiSiataJog^ Xenophon
Mem. I. 20.

Preface. .

Amono the most precious relics of ancient writers, which
have escaped the tooth of time, that wears away all things,
most justly deserve to be ranked Xenophon's Memorabilia of
Socrates ; because they are the production of one who was
well called the Attic Bee, and yet more because from them
alone, as from a pure fountain, we may learn tbe principles of
the life and philosophy of the Prince of ancient wise men.
For whatever, in this book, Xenophon has delivered to us of
the morals and doctrines of his master, bears every mark of
truth, and thoroughly answers to tbe idea of that dignity, which
by all ages has been ascribed to Socrates. Every where are
conspicuous an earnest desire of searching out and communica*
ting truth, a strong purpose of deriving from all knowledge
some advantages for the life of men, of turning others from
error and leading them to piety, to pure morals and to true
wisdom, by instructions and by example ; in fine, an excellent
method and simplicity in discussion, which found their way to
the persuasion of every man, and by which, most of all, the
Socratic philosophy commended itself to all antiquity ; Iso that
we cannot hesitate to render full confidence to Aeiiophon*
But in consulting Plato, another of the sources for the Socratic
doctrine, much caution is needed. For he usually ascribes his
own opinion to Socrates, and very firequently differs from Xen-
ophon, of whose faithful record there can be no doubt, or in-
troduces Socrates disputmg about subtile and knotty questions,
from which, we know he carefiiUy abstained, or indulges too

48 Theahgy of Socrates. [July

far his own poetic genius^ and forsakes the peculiar simplicitj
of his teacher. Since therefore we cannot employ the testimo-
ny of Plato without danger of error, and our purpose to set
forth the teachings of Socrates concerning the Deity, forbids
us to engage in a critical discussion on the discrepancies of au-
thors, we shall take Xenophon only for our guide, and collect
and arrange what this defender of his master has stated in dif-
ferent places, and attempt by brief reasonings to make clear
some points. which he has touched but lightly. But that we
may better show what advances Socrates made in the knowl-
edge of the divine mind, we will present a rapid sketch of the
estate of theology in Greece before his time.

SECTION I.

AN OUTLINE OF THE STATE OF THEOLOQT AMONG THE GREEKS

BEFORE SOCRATES.

^ I. The older Poets and Priests.

The religion, which the oldest priests and poets had taught,
was yet in its vigor in the age of Socrates, and none are igno-
rant of what absurd fables it was composed, and how utterly un-
worthy of the Divine majesty. Having fashioned their system
after the measure of human weakness, imputing to the gods,
wars, seditions, adulteries, and every crime, and sanctioning
every error of man by the example of a god and sometimes also
wrapping up in impious fables their theories of the material
world, and constructing cosmogonies not less monstrous than
ingenious, they aided to degrade religion by the very sweetness
of their poetry ; and while they did much to refine and soften
rude and fierce spirits, they also filled the life of men with
superstition.* For what can more engender contempt for a
God, and enkindle every lust, than to bold, that God himself is

* Cicero de datura Deorum^ I. 16. II. 24 seqq. III. 24 seq. The
disputants whom Cicero introduces in these places, inveigh coo se-
verely ogRinsc the poets ; who yet were not wholly free from blame ;
for though they bad no intention of making men superstitious, and
desired rather to please than to instruct, they really taught error, and
a false opinion of the Deity, to uncultivated men, and who could not
well distinguish the false and the feigned from the true.

1836.] Theology of Socratti. 49

the author of depraved desires ? which surely gives free license
to all lust, and all wickedness. Nor was the influence of the
priests confined within the walls of temples, or restrained to the
aflairs of private life. It reached to public business and the
administration of the State, and often by lying oracles, mysteries,
and other rites which wrought upon the imagination of super-
stitious men, became of more effect than the best counsels of
the wisest statesmen.

^ 2. The older Grecian Philosophers.

Neither did the ancient philosophers of Greece bring a clear-
er light to theology, — the Ionic, the Pythagorean,* the Eleatic,
Empedocles, Heraclitus, Leucippus, etc. For they, while they
bestowed great labor in investigating the nature of all things,
were accustomed chiefly to dispute concerning the principles
from which all things arise, and into which they may be re-
solved ; also concerning efficient causes, which they placed
in abstract notions, or sometimes even in mere words which
hardly implied a notion, as friendship and hatred, numbers, ac-
cident, necessity, etc. From these principles and notions, with
mere hypotheses founded on no observations, they vainly at-
tempted to explain and demonstrate, by subtile disputation, how
all things were formed. But the true cause of all things, God^
the creator and governor of the universe, they knew not, or
kept their knowledge of him far away from their researches in
philosophy.!

^ 3. Anaxagoras^

Already, had Anaxagoras, who a little before the age of
Socrates, stood forth the glory of Greece, begun to dispel the
thick darkness, which hitherto enveloped and buried the knowl-
edge of the Deity ; and first uttered the opinion that the form
and measure (descriptio et mo(J(us) of all things had been de-
vised by the wisdom and wrought out by the power of an infi-

* The error of those who have given the Pythagoreana credit for a
clear knowledge of the unity of God, has been refuted, with many
arguments by Meiners, in his treatise de vero Deo, p. 296 seq.

t Meiners, in the work just referred to, p. 248, seqq. has fully and
accurately explained the various opinions and systems of these phi-
losophers, respecting the cause of things.

Vol. XII. No. 31. 7

so T%eology of Socrates. [Jitlt

Dite mind.* But his doctrine was still too much encumbered
with the dreams and barren questions of the natural philoso*
phers of that age, nor was it made conducive to the regulation
of human life, by a devout worship of the true source and gov-
ernor of all things ; nor did it reach the common peopleyf to
whom the form of hb speculations was but ill adapted.

^4. The Sophists.

We now come nearer the times of Socrates himself, when
flourished a class of teachers, for many purposes useful, but per-
nicious for those most important, who were called Sophists. ;(
These men following the steps of the philosophers, who bad
gone before them, devoted themselves to the investigations of
natural science. They were the first, after the States of Greece
had grown rich, who became professed teachers of various arts,
and systems of learning. They bestowed their labors, not with-
out great personal advantage, on the promotion and improve-
ment of eloquence. Sometimes, even, they were rewarded
with public gifts and honors conferred by States. Toung men
were committed to their care, that they might prepare them for
both public and private life, by impartmg an extensive and va-
rious knowledge of aflairs. With the people, who purchased
at the highest prices the teachings which they sold with an un-
disguised ostentation, they had immense power, not only by
their eloquence but by their personal authority. But this con-
fidence and admiration of Greece they most basely abused.
They burned with an incredible love of glory and of gain. ^
They endeavored, with impudent and iron front, to persuade

* Cicero, de MUura Deonany I, II. Plato In Phaedooe, Tom. 1. p.
^1. eeqq. £d. BiponU

t Plato, 1. c.

I The passages, which pertain to the history of the Sophists, a his-
tory mainly to be gathered from Plato, have been collected by Mei-
ners, in GeschickU der fVissenschaften, etc. Vol. II., wher* be has ex-
plained at large their philosopby, arts, and manner of life ; topics on
which the plan of our inquiry will allow us only to touch.

§ These two (kults gradually made the name of the Sophists, ex-
ceedingly odious in Greece. Plato in Prolog, Tom. III. p. 93. E^.
Bip. in Sophisla. Tom* IL p. 213 seqq. So Cicero, Acad, (luaesl, IV.
23. ''They are called Sophists," says he, " who philosophise for the
sake of ostentation or of gain."

1838.] Tlieology of Socratet. 51

aU men, that they were the only teachers of wisdom, the only
guides to happiness, to virtue, and to honors. They taught
amid the multitudes, surrounded by the noblest and most prom-
bing youth of Greece. They proposed questions, and profess-
ed themselves ready to dispute on any topic which any one
might wish to hear discussed, that they might win the applause
of the unthinking crowd.* They delighted to accumulate mon-
ey, to sustain the expense of delicate and luxurious living, to
provide for the indulgence of every pleasure and every lust.
Naturally, therefore, they studied and followed the popular ca-
price, affinned the prejudices of the multitude, and by following,
swayed their blind impulses, at their own will and to their own
purposes.

We may readily conjecture, tbat a class of pen of principles
and manners so base and corrupt, could not but exert a most
pernicious influence on the youth of Greece, by instructions not
less corrupt and base. Some entertained unworthy and degrad-
ing opinions of the Deity. Others denied that there be Gods.
They taught that all things, which are or may be, are, or may
be, by nature, or accident, or art ; that the sun, earth, moon,
stars, are such, by chance and nature, not by an intelligent wis^
dom ; that all things in the world are but some compound from
a chance concurrence of opposites, heat and cold, dryness and
moisture, the soft and the hard, etc.; while other things which
have uses for human life, music, painting, medicine, agriculture,
knowledge of civil afiairs, are the product of art alone, or of art
combined with nature. But in nature, say they, are no gods,
but only in the subtle contrivances of governments, some of
which have instituted one and some another, as a politic re-
straint on the passions of men.f Religion being set aside, the

* Hippiaa furnishes a good example of the ostentation of the Soph-
ists. At the Olympic games, in the audience of ahnost all Greece,
he boosted, that there was nothing in any science which he did not
know. Cicero, de OraL III. 2SL In reference to the same peculiari-
ty, Xenophon calls the Sophists, loifg nari oiofiircvg ildwcUf Mem,
Lib. I. 4. 1.

t Plato, de Legibus X. svh init. In the same place, Plato com-
plains, that the Greeks were infected with three errors, which the
Sophists seem either to have taught, or if the popular opinion had
already embraced them, to have confirmed. Some denied alto-
gether the being of the gods. Some, while they allowed that there
are gods, supposed them too far elevated above human affairs, to care

SS Theology of Socrates. [July

obligations of justice were easily disposed of, which, j&om the
endless disputes of men about it, they contended, rests on no
firmer foundation, and that the only just right is that of success-
ful violence.* What need of more words ? They extended
their protection to avarice, to the inordinate love of glory, to
impure pleasures, to all acts of baseness. Virtue they mocked
at. Besides, they well knew how, with rare art, in subtle and
captious questions, to entangle their adversary, as in a net. In
fine they were strong in a fatal skill to unsettle the notions of
men on all subjects, which concern the security of public and
private life ; and by ever calling good, honorable and just, what
the universal sense of men has reckoned wrong, base, and un*
just, and the reverse, (that is by involving all things in crooked
and knotty reasonings) they at last persuaded men actually to
esteem them so. To be able to maintain any doctrine, on any
topic, was the characteristic and mark of a Sophist.

SECTION II.

Socrates and his Theology.
CHAP. 1.

80MB PREUMINAEY BBMAllKfl ON THE MANNER AND TEACHINGS OF

SOCEATEB.

^ 5. The peculiar character of his Mind.

Not only were the minds of the Greeks infected with these
envenomed and fatal doctrines of the Sophists, but growing
riches, as they are wont, had opened a free access to every in-
dulgence, when Socrates appeared with his more salutary teach-
ings. Yet even he would have attained no measure of success
in bis schemes of reforming men, had he not been sustained by
a so great, and as it were, divine impulse of genius, by such pe-
culiar piety, temperance, constancy, and, in fine, by a finn per-

for and coou-ol them. (Cf. Xenophon, Mem. I. 4. 10). And some,
while they maintained their being and a providence, thought they
could be easily appeased and bribfid by human service, like the fickle-
ness of men. (Mem. I. I. 19. I. 3. 3.)

• Plato. I. c.

1838.] Theohgy of Soaratu. 53

suasion that God himself had called him to philosophy.* Errors
were to be shaken off, with which himself had been imbued
from his early youth ; superstition, neglect of the gods, the pre-
judged and inveterate opinions of his fellow citizens were to be
warred with and overcome ; and highest task of all, the Sophists
were to be displaced from their influence and authority. And
most manifestly, he trod a different path from that of those usu*
rers of wisdom. They arrogantly declaimed ambitious and
boastful orations ; Socrates in popular discourse and m familiar
conversations discussed the conduct of human life.f The So-
phists abjured truth and virtue ; Socrates undermining by apt
questions their insidious sophisms, restored exiled truth and vir-
tue to his country. The Sophists demanded of their pupils
large sums of money ; Socrates despising illiberal gain, received
never a price for his instructions.^ The Sophists were splen-
did in their equipage, efieminate, and luxurious, unjust, and con-*
temners of the gods ; Socrates, a man of few wants, not neg-
lectful of his person nor yet over nice, patient of heat and cold,
frugal, just, pious.^ Such was the diversity in habits and mor-
als between our philosopher and his adversaries. Auxiliary to
these virtues were an uncommon suavity of manners, and a cer->
tain native sweetness of disposition, and colloquial humor.
Thus armed, Socrates with little difficulty, gained the friendship
of noble and ingenuous youth, whom he aided in the acquisi-^
tion of a knowledge truly useful, and trained to the love oi vir-
tue and of honor.

^ 6. The peculiarity of the teaching of Socrates.

Impelled by weighty reasons,|| Socrates omitted to consider
the questions, alike without the scope of the human intellect,

* Plato in Apologia Socratis, p. 67. Ed. Bip.

f Xenophon, Mem. I. 1. 16. I. 2. 18. IV. 7 and elsewhere.

{ Mem. I. 2. 5. and 60. 6. 5. and elsewhere.

{ Mem. 1. 6. 1. §§ 11. 18. 20. IV. 4, etc. Socrates never sought to
attain an empty reputation, by singularity and uncouthness, like Diog-
enes the Cynic, but only avoided a Greek like effeminacy, and follow-
ed the precept which Seneca, (Epist. V.) has expressed, ** We are to
aim at a better life than the mass of men pursue, not a contrary one ;
else we put away from us, and beyond our influence, those whom we
wish to amend.**

II The reasons may be found in Mem. 1. 1. 11 seqq. and IV. 7. 6.

54 Theohgy of Socrates. [JtJhT

and distracting It from the duties of life, conceming tbe primary
elements of all things, the universal nature, the ori^ ot things,
etc. which former philosophers had vainly labored lo explain,
and Jirstf as Cicero says,* called down philosopku from the
heavens, and gave her a dweUing in cities, and made her even
an inmate in our families, and forced her to search out the
truths of life and morals, cmd things good and evU. For, see*
ing to what extent, virtue and religion, the foundations of the
security of human society, had been undermined by the falla-
cious reasonings of the Sophists, with how little solid know-
ledge of afiairs the young rushed into the administration of the
State, and how erroneously on most subjects men judged, from
their ignorance of the true intrinsic valfie of things, Socrates was
used to define what b pious, what impious ; what honorable,
what base ; what just, what unjust ; what wisdom, what folly ;
what courage, what cowardice ; and other things, of which it
were a shame for a good and honest man to be ignorant.f Most
of all therefore did Socrates deserve well of the republic, for
which he formed good, just, and well instructed citizens ; of the
discipline of morals, the ideas of which he settled by accurate
definitions ; and especially of theology, for he sought with no
scanty measure of success, for one whose reason was his only
guide, after the author and governor of the universe. For he
first informed the minds of men with a more salutary idea of the
divine naturet, and bearing a nearer similitude to the true ; and
made such attainments even, that he not only left far behind
him the philosophers of former ages, but left almost nothing to
be discovered by the acute inquirers, who in after years were
guided by his light. No one indeed of those who followed So-
crates, although they may have demonstrated the being of a
God by a greater number of arguments, or may have more fully
investigated those which he brought forward, has surpassed his
master, in a clear and well assured knowledge of God, in piety

* Tuac. Quaest V. 4.

t Mem. I. 1. 16. AH these subjects Socrates calls human, under
which term he seems to have included every thing which pertains to
the life of man, and tends to promote its happiness, so that from this
class would not be excluded the knowledge of the divine mind. To
human, he opposes divine and celestial, which terms embrace all that
pertains to physics, and especially as it was taught is that age, U>
general cosmology, or the natural theory of the universe.

tj_

1838.] Theology of Socrates. 5S

and tbe application of tbesology to the fonnation of moral princi-
ples and habits. Nay, since he had well surveyed the limits
of human intellect, (as we may infer from his whole mode ^of
philosophizing) and devoted himself to the investigation of those
subjects which do not transcend those limits, he wisely avoided*
the errors of many later inquirers, who have busied themselves
in* questions beyond the reach of human knowledge, and which
have no relation to human life.

The philosophy of Socrates is most highly commended by
the method he used in communicating his instructions. This^
method is set forth by Xenophon, Lib. IV. cap. 6, but is bet*
ter seen in the Socratic Dialogues, preserved by the same wri-
ter. The great art of Socrates lies in this, that starting from
certain truths well known by experience to all, by various very
simple questions to which the respondent cannot but answer
rightly, he led him to perceive a necessary connection between
what Socrates would teach him, and that which himself had con-
ceded to be clear and unquestionable.. From the use of this
method men were induced more readily to admit the instruc-
tions of Socrates, because they seemed not so much to have
learned from another, as to have taught themselves.

We shall now proceed more closely to our purpose, and at-
tempt more exactly to unfold the doctrine of Socrates concern-
ing God. This examination naturally divides itself into twa
parts, the first of which is tbe doctrine of Socrates concerning
the nature of the Deity, and is chiefly to be derived from the
Memorabilia Lib. L cap. 1. and 4. and Lib. IV. cap. 3. The
other part is the doctrine of Socrate* concerning divine worship,,
which is best explained in Lib. L cap. 3. and lib. IV. cap. 3.
and 6.

* Balbus, apud Ciceronera de Natura Deorum, Lib. II., the defend*
er of the stoical philosophy, uses, for demonstrating the existence of a
God, almost every where, the arguments of Socrates, only more wide-
]y investigated and applied ; and so long as he treads in his footsteps,
he is close upon the confines of truth, but the moment he oversteps
the limits prescribed hy Socrates, he is involvM in errors. Again and
again were it to be desired that a greater number of those who wer»
trained io tbe discipline of Socrates, had persisted in his plan, and
never, swayed by a fondness for nov^ty, departed from the noble and
admirable simplicity of their master. From a perverse desire to
bring forward something of their own, they have often exchanged hLs
truth for their own falsehood.

56 JJieology of Socrata. [July

CHAP. II.

BART FIRST. OF THE THEOLOGY OF SOCRATES ; OF THE NAT17RK

OF GOD.

^ 7. The way in which Socrates came to the knowledge

of the true Ood,

When Socrates perceived how little the study of nature, after
the manner of the philosophers of his age, availed for the
knowledge of the true cause of the universe, he put away their
unprofitable investigation of causes, and subtile and empty
questionings concerning . the intimate nature and elements of
things ; * and from the observation of the facts of nature, and
from the contemplation of the wonderful wisdom and constant
order every where conspicuous in the universe, combined with
a most accurate study of the minds of men, he sought to know
the Auth6r of all things, his nature and perfections. This way,
which alone could lead the weak intellect of man to truth, he
followed to most happy issues. How skilfully he followed it
and what knowledge of his objects be attained, we are now
to show.

^ 8. That God is an intelligent Being.

And first, Socrates firmly believed, and eloquently taught,
that Ood is cm intelligent beings rational and wise, a most ex*
ceUent intelligence, the governor of the world, and the parent
of the human race. This fiiith and doctrine, we learn, were es-
tablished on reasonings such as these. 1 perceive, he says, in
myself an intelligent nature, which we call mind and soul. I
perceive, when I do any thing in reference to a certain end, that
I do it for no necessity, or chance, but from a certain intimate
energy of my mind, which in its thought has foreseen this end,
and controls and directs the actions by which I endeavor to
attain it.f Hence when I perceive other men resembling my-
self in form, and manner of living and acting, I understand that
their actions also which have respect to some end, in like man-
ner proceed from an intelligent nature, which dwells in their
bodies and governs them. . When therefore I see an excellent

^ Plato in Phaedone^ p. 220 seqq. Tom. I. Ed. Bip. Xen. Jlfeai. I.
I« 11 Mqq. t Mem. I. 4. 8 aeqq.

1638.] Theohgy of Socrates. 57

poem, or a picture, or a statue, or any other work of art, skil-
fiilly wrought, I affirm that they are not the work of chance ;
nay, I cannot but believe that they are the workmanship of
some ardst, whose intelligence, manifesting itself in this, his
work, I wonder at and admire. And the more eminent the
skill of which any work bears the marks, the more apt the con-
sent of all the parts to some excellent design, so much the
greater I hold to be the intelligence of the artist. If, therefore,
in the contemplation of the world and its parts, there is found a
XM>nspiring and convergence of an infinite number of things, of
the most diverse kmds, to the accomplishment of most noble
results, a plan and ordering of events and circumstances, so
many, that should the wisest of mortals wish to ascertain them,
an endless series of ages could find no limit to his inquiries ;
does not right reason compel us to acknowledge that the world
also sprung from the power and will and wisdom of some mind,
and that too a most eminent and excellent mind, and that these
immense bodies, arranged throughout the universe, move and
maintain their orde'r,f under the guidance of a most wise gov-
ernor. The mere consideration of the nature of man makes
it evident that there are ends aimed at in the constitution of
things, and that all things are most carefiiUy adapted to the
attainment of them. In some particulars, at least, the observa-
tion of every one may suffice. How admirable is the structure
and disposition of those organs, through which we gain a knowl-
edge of surrounding thmgs ! How remarkably all the parts of
every organ cooperate to effect that which we see to be effect-
ed by them ! Thus, the eye is made most fit for seeing, the
ear for hearing, the tongue for discerning the savors of sub-
stances introduced into the mouth. Who would not acknowl-
edge it to be the result of intelligence, that the eyes, on account
of their weakness, are furnished with lids, like doors, which are
opened when there is need of seeing, and closed in sleep ? Still
further, when we see that lashes are provided for them, that
they be not injured by the winds, and brows placed above, that
the sweat flowing from the forehead may do no harm ; when
we consider the structure of the ears which are open to every
sound, yet are never fiUed ; the formation of the teeth, some of
which are suited to cutting and others to chewing the food ; the
position of the mouth, through which the food is received, in

• I. 4 8 aeqq. • f I *• 8.

Vol. Xn. No. 31. 8

SB Theology of SocraU$» [Jolt

the neighborhood of the nostrils and the eyes ; when we le-
gard the natural desire of offipiing, the innate love of parents
for their children, the strong desire for their prolonged life, and
the great horror and aversion they entertain for the loss of them ;
can we doubt that some being endued with intelligence and
wisdom, has made man ? * Reason forbids ; and ti^ very na-
ture of things compels us to confess that all this universe exists
by the power of some intelligence. The consideration of our
own bemg, may also in another way, persuade us, that besides
our own mind, there is, far higher than man, another mind,
which ought to be judged the fountam, as it were, of human
souls. For as those particles of eanh, of fire, of water, the
harmonious combination of which is our body, are separated
bom that vast mass of matter that lies without and around us
in nature ; so we ought not to imagine that thd soul only, by
some chance, we know not how, became united with the body,
no other soul existing but that of man, but rather to believe,firoim
the analogy, that there is likewise besides our own, some infi-
nite mind, from which, as from a fountain, the minds which in-
habit these bodies are separated and derived, f

^ 9. Ood is omnipotent.

If, from a work, the power of the workman is proportionably
known, the contemplation of this world most clearly shows, that
we ought to ascribe, not power only to God, but the highest,
even infinite power. For how vast and numberless the bodies
scattered over the boundless universe ! They ever move on-
ward in wonderful order, and with a swfftness which works no
harm, and yet exceeds our thought. They serve perpetual
uses, yet suffer no loss and no injury. They know nothing of
disease or of corruption, they never wear out or decay. AJl is
good, supremely good ! %

^ 10. The goodness J wisdom^ and providence of Ood.

From the whole structure of the worid and the distribution
of its parts, it is apparent that in the creative plan of the Deity,
he regarded, as an end, the safety, convenience, and happiness

* L 4. 4. Add what is said just below of the wisdom and provi-
dence of God.

fl.4.8. tIV.3,13.

1638.] Thtptogy of Soeraiei. 59

of ammated bmgs, and ehiefl J of rttional man ; andthathebas
attained this end 1^ the wisest and fittest means. We axe con-
strained, therefore, to regard God as a good and wise being.
Ne?er has be deserted the work which he has projected and
began, but bj increasing power he presenres the course c^
nature unchanged, and never for a moment ceases to embrace
the whole drde of his creation in his wise, benignant, and care-
fiil proimlenoe. EspeciaUy does he exercise a notable and con-
tinued care over all beings endued with life and sense, and most
of all over man, for whose use chiefly, has he prepared all
things, that nothing may be lacking, which might minister to
hb necessities or satb6ctk>n. He has provided light, without
which, although we had eyes, we should be blind. He has
given us night to meet our necessity of rest, and fitted it toir
our comfortable repose. The sun by bis light discloses to us
the aspect of all things, and by his unvarying course, measures
for us, the hours of the day. ' The uncertain darkness of night
is sufficiently relieved by the stars. Further, since the life of
man cannot be sustained without food, numberless varieties of
finits spring from the earth, in diflerent seasons, and not those
only which we need for the support of life, but those which de^
light the sense. Ample and abundant witnesses of a forecasting
\i^sdom, are the abundance of water, the use of fire, the well
ordered changes of the stars, and chiefly of the sun, which when
it has finished its southward course, returns again to us, that
some products of the earth may be ripened, and that othenr,
whose season has passed, may be«dried up and withered by its
nearer heat ; and these changes are reguliarly so arranged, that
this beneficent planet never can approach so near as to bum
us by its intense ardor, nor recede so far as to fi^eze us by the
cold of its distance, while at the same time, they fill the earth
with the richest blessings for its inhabitants. This also is most
wisely ordained, that neither winter's frost nor midsummer^s
heat comes upon us suddenly and at once, but so that we ex-
perience a gradual increase of each for a long time before their
greatest severity.*

^ 11. TTie goodness of God to cM men.

The conveniences thus far considered, are mostly, common to

man with the other animals. But man excels the brutes in

■ — —

* IV. a 3 seqq.

00 TTieology of Socrates. [Jult

most particulars. He tames -and domesticates them, feeds upoo
their milk and flesh, subjects those much stronger than himself,
and compels them in many wajs to serve his convenience.
While, moreover, God has made other animals prone to the
earth, that thej may eat, he has given man an upright form and
gait, a wider and upward vision, and freer and more certain
motion. On other animals thus prone, feet only have been be-
stowed to serve their needful change of place ; man has also
hands, ready and swift ministers to his necessity and safety.*
All animals have tongues, man only can form articulate sounds,
by means of which we disclose to each other the feelings of our
hearts, and communicate whatever of good we have found,
enact laws, apd administer commonwealths. The gift of speech
is the source of our social life.f

Nay further, continues Socrates, God has not only cared for
our body, but has given us a most excellent mind, god-like,
and a partaker of his nature. | For what soul of any other an-
imated being, has the perception of the gods, who have sowon-
drously fashioned all things beautiful and great ? What other
worships the gods ? What other has such power as man, to
anticipate and provide for hunger and thirst, to ward off cold
and heat, to cure disease, to acquire knowledge, and retain in
memory things seen and heard ? Who does not see that men
are as gods, among other animals, far excelling them in nature,
in body and soul ? For, we have a form of body well suited
to our peculiar soul. What could human reason, shut up in
the body of a bull ? or what would be the use of hands without
reason ?

In what height of dignity Socrates placed the human soul,
which, he afiirmed, has a certain fellowship with God, may be
clearly seen from what we have already said. Hence the
burning zeal, with which he urged bis friends to obey the in-
scription on the temple at Delphi, and attain the knowledge of
themselves, their own nature,' their own excellencies and de-
fects, ^ studiously to practise and perfect their powers of mind, ||
to love virtue, and avoid every meanness and base desire which
waste and defile the soul. IT

• IV. 3. 10. 1. 4. 11. f IV. 3. 11 seqq. I. 4. 14.

1 1.4.8. IV.3. 14. § III. 7.9. IV. 2. 24.

II III. 6. 16 seqq. III. 9. 1 seqq. IV. 1. 2 seqq.
IT I. a 6 seqq. 1. 5. II. 1 ec alibi.

1838.] Theology of SocnOu. 61

And since Qpr phSosopher so clearly saw and so eloquently
seited the truth concerning God^ and the sout^ and virtue, who
can doubt that he also foresaw th^ immortality that shall follow
our present being ? Xenophon indeed in his Memorabilia does
not explicitly treat of this point;* but in the Cyropaedia,t
in which he seems to have wished to express the idea
of a good prince, after the teachings of his own master, he
introduces Cyrus, on his death bed, discoursing, plainly in the
manner of Socrates, on the immortality of the soul ; so that we
have the highest probability that nearly all that discourse origi*
nated in the instructions of Socrates. The passages are well
known in Plato, who indeed has intermingled many of his own
speculations, in which Socrates has discussed this topic nobly
and at large. :(

^ 12. OodPs peculiar care of inditiduaU ; also of ditination
arid the genius^ to caUed, of Socrates*

. Socrates believed not only that God cares for the whole race
of men in general, but, that in a peculiar manner he regards
the mterest of every individual. For though man by the
strength of his intellect embraces the knowledge of many things^
and can in many circumstances be guided by his own wisdom,
yet it often happens that he cannot of himself determine what
course of conduct he ought to follow, plainly because he can-
not see the end, from the beginning.^ In such doubtfiil cases,
God has vouchsafed to intimate, by various signs, (the science
of which, is called divination,||) what scheme shall lead to the
best issues. Most of all, does he regard the safety of good
men, if they, in affiiirs for which their own reason is insufficient,
have recourse to him, and by fervent prayer, and fit worship,

* This question did not perhaps appear to Xenophon of such ooii-
sequence, that he must dwell largely upon it, since the doctrine of
the immortality of the soul was a common one anong the Qre^s.
Yet when in these same Memorabilia, (chap 8. Lib. IV.) we read with
how confident aad cheerful a mind he spoke of his coming dissolu-
tion, and how much firmness he manifested in immediate expecta-
tion of it, we cannot avoid the conviction, that he too believed in the
contmued existence of the soul after this life.

t Lib. VIIL c. 7.

t Compare Meiners Geschichte der Wiasenschaften, Vol. II. p»
406 seqq. § Xen. JIfem. L 1. 7 seqq. | IV. 7. 10.

68 neokgjf (^ SocraUs. [Smt

seek his hmr, never shall they be tamed away unisstnicted.
With cheerful hope^ may they expect all good from him, who
alooe knoweth the event of all things.* Socrates seems to
have supposed that men may partake of the divine wisdom, b
a twofold manner ; by signs btemal, and external. To the
internal he seems to have referred that wisdom, which God
himself directly, and by*no outward means, imparts to the pwos
man, as it were by inspiration, if in his hour of doubt he trust-
fully seeks afier the wisdom of God.f Hence Socrates was
used to say that Ood himself was his counseUer and monitor.
Which I oo not think to be received as it commonly is, as if be
affirmed that some tutelary deit^, some guardian genius had
been specially assigned to him, in preference to other men ;
at least, no one would readily derive such an opinion fipora the
works of Xenophon. For if we read the passage b his first
book, cap. 1. ^ S seqq., in which, he particularly treats of this
subject, I and compare with it other passages respecting divina-
tion, we shall gather no more than this, that Socrates affirmed,
that the same God whom he adored as the governor of the uni-
verse and parent of the human race, indicated what, in obscure
cases, should be done, to himself and to all who earnestly woi^
ship him. ^ At the same time we shall see fix)m the same pas-

• 1. 1. 9. 1. 4 18. IV. a 13. c£ IV. 8 and below § 18. on in-
ward wonhip.

t We ought the len to wonder that Socrates entertained this opin-
ion, since he was accustomed to speak of these same endowments of
mind, as eminent gif%s, which are to be ascribed to the angular be-
nignity of the Deity. — Mem. 1. 1. 9. cf. I. 4. 13.

t ^ Every body knows,'' says Xenophon, ** that Socrates used diyi-
nation. For in every man's mouth is his assertion that the Deity
foreshowed to him the future. And on this ground mainly, it seems
to me, he was capitally accused, as one who had introduced new gods.
But in this he introduced no new gods. For whatever men believe,
there is such a thing as divination ; they avail themselves of birds, ora»
cles, prodigies, and sacrifices, to learn the future from them. Now these
men believe, not that the birds themselves, or the men whom we ac-
cidentally meet, know what may be for the profit of those who seek
direction from the gods, but that the gods by these tokens forewarn
us; yet most men are used to say, speaking in common phrase,
that they are persuaded or dissuaded by these bhrds and by these pro-
digies. But Socrates, suiting his language strictly to the judgment
of his mind, used to say that God himself fore wanted and admonish-
ed him."

§ The following are the principal passages of Xenophon, which es-

1838.] Theology of Socrates. 63

sages, that his adversaries, even theoi misled by their envy of
him, misinterpreted his opinions. Under external signs, are to
be included the more common kinds of divination, auguries,
prodigies, sacrifices, and oracles, which Socrates seems not al-
together to have despised,* perhaps because he conceived them
to have an efficacy somewhat like that of lots, by aid of which,
m doubtiiil cases, God may foreshow to men, what ought to be
done, or what shall be the event.f But although GckI wishes
OS in doubtful eases, thus to take counsel of himself, thb favor
of divination is by no means to be abused. They are insane,
and guilty of a wrong, Socrates was used to say, who, through
sloth or superstition, neglect to use their own reason, and seek,
by divination, to explain those things which God has given

tabliflh the opinion, that Socrates ascribed his own foresight (fiaynsi^y)
not to any gtmua peculiar to himself, but to the supreme Deity. First
the discussion, Lib. {.cap. 1. § 2 seq. where Xenophon, professedly
treating of the prophetic power (^oyriicg) of Socrates, uses promiscu-
ously the words ^«o^ ^«o2, to da^Mvunf, which elsewhere are in the
same manner applied to the Deity. Then, Lib. L 4. 19. where So-
crates plainly attributes to the gods (to% ^soT;) tlie grounds of the
practice of divination (to ofifialpMf ntql op&gintdmtf uirtw). And
likewise Lib. I. 4. 18^ to the Divinity (t^ M^). Nay, in L 1. 9. and
IV. 3. 19 seq. (comp. L 4. 18.) he plainly says that God indieatea the
future, not to himself only, but to every man> who, by sincere piety,
seeks to gain his ftvor. Finally, in Lib. I. 3. 4. we find the declara-
tion, tl 8i T» doUt^ ovrf ariiMd'nxr&ah naga tuv &9(&v, etc. From
which I think it abundandy evident that Socrates did by no means
affirm that intimations of the future were made to him, by some pe-
culiar genius. Conf. IV. 3. 12., 8. 5. seq. 11.

♦ Mem. L 1. 6. L 4. 15.

t Whether Socrates made so much of oracles as has seemed to
some learned men, may, I think, be doubted. I have not sufficient
evidence of it, nor can it be supposed that the frauds and artifices of
the priesthood could have been utterly a secret from Socrates. The
meaning of the advice which he gave Xenophon, when be deliberat*
ed whether he should join Cyrus in Asia, that he should consult the
Delphic ApoUo on the subject of his meditated exeorsion, Xenophon
himself satisfactorily declares, in his Expedition of Cyrus near the
beginning of the third book, where he expressly treats of this matter.
The sum of that statement is that Socrates in his own private judg-
ment approved the scheme of Xenophon, but feared lest it might
bring upon him the odium of his fellow citizens ; and to avoid this
odium, he judged it prudent for Xenophon to strengthen himself by
the autiiority of the oraele, in a ftvorable reply.

64 Theology of Soerates. [Juu

man to ascertain and uhderstand, by the use of bis own radoDal

Siwers, and with the aids of human experience and industry,
ot less insane, he aflirmed them to be, who will never apply
for guidance to the divine wisdom, and esteem their own reason
competent to every emergency. Those who would avoid alike
superstition and a aisregard of any expression of the divine will,
he counselled earnestly to cultivate those gifts of intellect which
God has bestowed upon iqen, and strenuously to avail them-
selves of all the resources of human skill, that, m their need,
they may plan wisely ; and in ckcumstances, in which human
skill and means of knowledge (aQ, when they cannot well trust
their own judgment, or the suggestions of other men, they must
have recourse to the wisdom of God as revealed by divinadon.*

^ 13. Ood is everywhere, and knows aU things.

As Socrates supposed God to care and provide for all things,
and always to consult for the interests of men, it were but con-
sistent for him to conceive the same bemg to be present every-
where, and to see and know all things. We are conscious, he
says,t that our mind is present to our whole body, and governs
it accordmg to its will ; we ought in like manner to believe that
the wisdom, which presides over the universe, is present to the
whole wodd, and oiders all things after its own pleasure. It is
not to be imagined that our eyes can discern objects at the dis-
tance of many stadia, and that the eye of God cannot see all
things ; it is not to be imagined that our minds can be occupied
with what is transacted in our neighborhood, in Sicily and in
Egypt, and that the divine mind cannot be intent at the same
time upon all things. If indeed, in such manner as by acts of
friendship, we ascertain who are willing to be our fiiends ; and
by conferring favors, who are grateful ; and by asking advice,
who are prudent ; we are willing by worshipping God, to ascer-
tain if he will impart his wisdom to us in our doubts; then
clearly shall we perceive that the divine nature is such and so
great, that it sees at once all things, and hears all things, is every
where, perceives the inmost thoughts and purposes of our hearts,
and exercises a watchful care over all things.^

^ 14. Ood is invisible.
But some one will say, we do not see the creator and gov-
* Mem, 1. 1. 6 seqq. f L 4. 17 seqq. { Loc. cit. and I. L 19.

1 &38.] Theology of Socrates. 65

•

eraorof the world, as we ^ee the authors of human works. We
are not to wait, Socrates wodd reply, till we can behold the
form of God ; the -contemplation of his works should constrain
us to worship and adore him.. Yet neither do we see with our
eyes, our own mind, even, which of all things .we know is most
intimately allied to the divine nature; only from its effects we
perceive it to be lord of the body.* We may not rashly look
upon the sun, from which we enjoy the highest benefits, nor are
the winds and other ministers of the gods, whose effects we see,
perceived by our eyes. So also the power of the Divinity,
although itself escapes our senses, is to be* learned from the
niighty works, which we see daily accomplished by it.f

$15. God i$ one.

9

In reading Xenophon we notice that Socrates speaks some-
times of God, in the singular number, sometimes of Gods,
in the plural, and seems on this subject to be wavering and in
the greatest uncertainty.]: Whether he conjectured, that there
are many deities of an inferior order ; or thought 4 the God-
bead, (ro da^fiopiov) in respect of various attributes, might be
, called Gods, (tovg ^sovg) in the plural, as, for example, that one
and the same God might be worshipped under the name of Jupi-
ter, as the father and preserver of the human race, and under
the name of Neptune, as the ruler of the seas ; or whether he
thus spoke in accommodation to the common opinion and lan-
guage of his countrymen, and that he might secure a more
ready hearing for doctrines remote from their ordinary appre-
hension and habit of thought, this at least is clear beyond doubt,
as well from the entire scope and method of every discussion, in
which Socrates professedly treats of the Divinity, as from the va-
rious names, or rather descriptions by which he designates Him,||

• I. 4. 9. IV. 3. 14. t IV. a 13 leq.

t Cicero, de MUwra Ikorum, I. 12.

^ So IV. 3. 13r the other gode (oi alXoi &$ol) seern to be coDtraited
with the supreme Deity ; yet whom he meant by the other gods is
Boroewbat in doubt.

II The names are chiefly these, o S'tog I. 4. 13. 17. etc. to ^«Sor
I. 4. 18. to doitftovtop 1. 1. 2. seq. IV. 3. 13. seq. etc. 6 i^ a^fxVQ noww
ar^ifinovg I. 4. 5. ao<pbg dtifttov^yog I. 4. 7. { h nawtl tpQorrivig I. 4.
17. 0 toy oXq9 xiafAW cvrtattap, nal crvvt/aiy not isl xQ^f^ivoig at^«/94
Tf %al v/ia nal ay^^aior nuqixwf^ ti [iiyiata nganwf *ql wxofo^ww.

IV. a la

VoL,XILNo.3l. 9

66 Theology of Socrates. [Jclt

that he believed that there is one only Ood, the creator^ pre-
server, and goveraor of the world, and that God is, in the
highest seDse, powerful, good, wise, benevolent tonien,*knowiDg
all things, provident for iQl things j omnipresent.

CriAP. III.

OF THE WORSHIP OF G01>.

^16. The necessity and utility of divine worship. .

Socrates has assigned various reasons why the Deity should
be worshipped by men^ And first, because, though he is so far
above us, he yet thinks us worthy of his interest in our wants,
and regard for our happiness.* Again, because by the worship*
of him, we may best learn his goodness, love, providence, and
good will to us.f Still more, because there is an instinctive
tendency to adoration of the gods. For whence those fierce
stings of conscience, which night and day goad and torment
them who have done wrong ? Whence that loAy calmness of a
mind conscious of its innocence and goodness, if there is not in
men an innate sentiment of the being of a God, who can reward
and punish them, whose laws they ought to obey, whose person
they are bound to reverence ? Nor ought that opinion to be
taken as resting on slight grounds, or as conceived under any illu-
sion, which has ever j^revailed in the public institutions <>f all na-
tions, and has been the intimate conviction of the best and wisest
men.]: Truly this is a divine law, written by God himself on
the soul of man — worship god — ^which law whoever despises,
him a punishment that cannot be escaped, shall necessarily fol-
low. No one can with impunity break the divine laws, for fi^om
the very act, b which they are contemned, the 'punishment
arises, by natural consequence.^ Thus from the divine laws to
the human, has been transferred this ordinance concerning the
worship of the gods ; not from any evil design, but because it
has been made clear that the State, which is not restrained by

• 1. 4. 10. t I. 4. 18. X I. 4. 16. IV. a 16.

§ IV. 4. IDseq. This passage contains a remarkable discuflBion of
the natural laws engraven by the D^ity on our souls.

1838 .] 1%eology of 8ocraie$, 67

rererence for the Deity, must be disturbed and harassed by per-
petual wars, seditions, deceits, wrongs, 6erceness, and other evils
most pernicious to the social life of men, or by the severest
penalties connected with the disregard of the laws of civil
union.*

^ 17, i%e (mtvfard worship of Ood.

So far as pertains to the outward worship of Deity, Socrates,
both in woros and acts, followed the law of the State, and ex-
horted others to do the same.f He offered sacrifices after the
manner of his fathers on the altars, public and private, and paid
his vows to the gods in the temples of the city. (cf. ^ 15.) For
he judged them to be engaged in afiairs out of their sphere, and
to have undertaken a useless and unnecessary labor,| who
wish to change by personal influence, the forms of religion which
have been consecrated by the authority of the State. Socrates
therefore mainly endeavored to make common a purer idea of God;
conceiving that this would put to flight other abuses, which are
sustained by formal rites alone. But in making sacrifices he
stronsly commended the precept of Hesiod, xoMt/yo/i^y igduv
ii^ a^avdroia^ &io7ai. For God is not persuaded as men are,
by splendid gifts, and magnificent tokens of respect, but is best

f)Ieased with the reverence of the pious. Hence Socrates be-
ieved that the $canty oflTerings of the poor are not less accepta-
ble to God than the costly and noble sacrifices of the rich. If
it were not so, he must often prefer the oflferings of the evil to
those of the good. But life were not desirable, if the Deity
were better pleased with the sacrifice of a wicked man, because
it is rich, than of a good man, which might be of slight value.^

^ 18. THe inward worship ofOod.

From what has been said, it is suflSciently evident that So-
crates judged the true worship of God to consist not in actions

of outward splendor, but in the feelings of the hearttoward him,

II — ■ - .

• Cf. Cic. de Legg, IL7.

t Xen. Jtfeift. I. 3. 1. Conf. Cicero ds Legg, II. 7.

X This I think is the force of the words nBiftsQ/ovg nal (uxtalavg^
which Xenopbon used in the passage just cited, nor do I see why, as
ia commonly done, ntquqyovq should bo translated tluptrsUiiixm,

§ iMeiit. I. u. 3.

68 TTieology of Soeratu* [ivht

and in a sincere love of virtue. He who would be accepted of
God, ought, he says, above all, to express to him the feelings of
a grateful heart.- Although no man can render a gratitude ade-
quate to his kindness, yet we can attain the favor of God, if
with constant and unremitting effort (which is the force of He-
siod's xaddvpaiiiip) we strive to conform every action of our life
to his will, to commend ourselves alway lo his judgment, and
desire in all the strength and sincerity of our souls to please and
obey him.* If we hold resolutely to such a plan of life, and
approve ourselves to God by such worship and obedience, we
ought to repose in him the highest trust, and not only to seek
from hicn all good things by prayer, but to expect them also
with firm faith. In framing our prayers, he specially enjoined
that we should not decide what things are good and desirable
from our own erring judgnlent, and as it were prescribe by
name what we desire to obtain ; but that, simply and in gener-
al terms, we should ask of God, such things as are truly good
and salutary, and firmly persuade ourselves that he best knows
what will be for our interest, and from his own wisdom and be-
nignity, will bestow suoh things in a manner far better than ac-
cording to our feeble and imperfect choice.f

* IV. 3. 15 Beq. III. 9. 15. IV. 6. 2 seq. Socrates not ooly uught
thifl by bis precepts, but approved them by hit example. Thus when
once be was a senator, and the whole people wished unjustly to cod<-
demn nine magistrates to death, Socrates who at the time presided in
the assembly, refused to put the question to a vote, though the people
were exceedingly indignant, and himself was threatened by the more
powerful citizens; preferring the sanctity of his oath to the .favor of
the people and his personal safety. Mem, 'h 1. 18. This also is an
eminentproof of his piety, that when he thought he had* received any
token of the Divine will, he would no more allow himself to be per-
suaded to act contrary to that declared will, than he would be per-
suaded to choose a blind and ignorant guide in place of one clear-
sighted and well acquainted with his route. He also severely censu-
red the madness of others, who that they may avoid the reproof or
ridicule of men, dare to disobey the known and published will of God.
So far even did he reverence the will of God above all things else,
that he was ready to suffer death, when he had judged Him to have
decreed it, reckoning that be can turn to our advantage what seems to
us the greatest evil. Mem. I. 3. 4. IV. cap. 8. throughout.

f IV. 3. 17. I..3. 2. Evidently suited to the genius of Socrates,
and concurring with the testimony of Xenopbon-^ is the discussion of
Socrates concerning divine worship and prayers, in the second AIci-

1838.] Th€ology of Socratu. 69

Qmcbmcn,

This is nearly all that Xenophon has delivered to us of the
doctrine of Socrates respecting God and his worship. Of this
doctrine dij9ferent men have formed widely different judgments*
Some have dared to equal and even to prefer Socrates to the
holy founder of our religion and his apostles; at whose vain
attempts we may well wonder. For though he has taught many
things excellent, noble, and true ; yet not only are the same
things found again and again in the sacred writings, but placed
in clearer light, and accompanied by many other truths, more
closely connected with' the true happiness of man, of which no
traces are to be found in Socrates. Others, on the contrary,
have endeavored to depreciate the well deserved fame of So-
crates ; partly through ignorance ; partly excited by the rash
boldness of those who have dared, through undue admiration of
Socrates, to undervalue divinely revealed truth ; partly without
regard to the different circumstances of different ages, judging
Socrates as a christian philosopher,- and demanding more than
is reasonable of him. Hence tliey are accustomed harshly to
censure many things m him, which are not sustained by suffi-
cient evidence of their truth, or which ought not to be severely
blamed, when the age and manners among which he lived are
considered, though in our times and with our better light and
christian knowledge, they would merit strong terms of reprehea-
sion. But plainly, Socrates is not to be regarded as a man en-
tirely free from the ordinary failings of humanity ; nor as a
teacher who can be expected to purify the discipliue of morals
and the doctrine of divine things from every stain and error, and
lead men to that height of knowledge and moral safety, to which
God himself has opened to us the way in Christ ; but as one,
who, under the guidance of sound reason, desired to attain, as
&r as the weakness of human nature, the state of his age, and
the envy of his fellow citizens would allow, to the i^nderstand-
ing of the true God and of virtue, and thus to a life of happi-
ness, and who wished to bring others to the same end, by miid

blades of Plato, which may well l>e compared. And the supposition
18 not without plausibility which has before been maintained by some
(Athenaeus Lib. XI. p. 506.' c.) that the dialogtie, which is entitled
Alcibiades Minor, was written not by Plato, but by Xenophon.

70 Tke WMpont of [July

ooiinseb and persuasions.* That the efforts of this most excel-
lent man were not without efl»cty we may easily learn from the
consideration of his life and teachings ; and, aner the most ex-
act scrutiny and judgment, we cannot but call him the prince
of the philosophers of antiquity, and assign him a place in that
rank ot good men, whose memory is ever precious.*

ARTICLE IV.
The Weapons or Universalism Reversed.

By RaT. Edwin Holt, ^orUmootb, New Hamptbira.

Universalism, in its mutations, has reached a form that con-
flicts with not a few of ti)e most obvious principles of inspired
truth. Its march of improvement illustrates .the tendency of a
favorite hypothesis to blind the eye to contradictions of the most

flying character, in a doating pursuit of one engrossing end.
t professes to teach a system of duty, and yet saps the founda-
tion of all responsibility by making human conduct the result
of unavoidable circumstances. It professes to prepare men for
the heavenly world, and vet acknowledges no connection be-
tween the doings of this life and the retributions of eternity.
It professes to give the most exalted conceptions of the Deity,
and yet on some essential points it degrades, more than any

* It was ever the highest care of Socrates, to inform his friends
with the true idea of God and of his relation to men, that not in the
light only and in the presence of men, but in solitude, often the moth-
er and the nurse of the worst counsels and vices, they might be re-
strained from all m&lice, meanness, injustice, and impiety. Mem* I. 4.
19. IV. 3. 2. The doctrine of Socrates would have made much
greater progreaa, had it not been resisted partly by the common su-
perstition which could not he attacked without' danger, and which
threatened him with a prison and with death, and partly by the influ-
ence of the Sophists, who sustained by their authority the sentiments
of the multitude. (Cf. IV.) For who does not prefer to be learned,,
to being a learner? (Cf. Plato, de Repub. Lib. VI. Tom. VII. p. 87.
seq.) To Socrates may well be applied the words of the same writer
in the Timaeus, Toy (dp noaiJ^w nal nmiqa tov3« «oi; jfoaro; ti^up n
ij^oy mX ctf ovTOt IK naptaq idvpotop Uyup.

1838,] VnhersaKsm Rtoerted^ 71

other system, the divine cbanicter. It uses with gr^at freedom
its own* form of'reasoning to demolish the system of evangelical
faith, but seems not to be aware that its own weapons may be
turned with success against its own citadel. We are not sure
that the friends of truth have observed how easily and how
completely* the heavy ordnance of universalism may be turned
against itself.

It is proposed to show, in reference to the leading features of
Che divine character, that the arguments with which universal-
ism attacks our sentiments, may be retorted upon itself with de-
cided success. If these arguments work for the system, they
work equally well against it.

I. Universalism brings against Ood the odious charge of
partiality.

It denies the doctrine of a future judgment. It teaches that
our future state is not affected by the doings of this life. It
asserts that all men are punished according to their deserts in
this world. It restricts the punishment of sin to the various
misfortunes of life, the reproaches of conscience, and the pangs
of death. The system that pronounces these evils to be the
only penal results of sin, cannot vindicate itself from the charge
of glaring partiality. The following specifications of this charge
may be enumerated.

1. According to this system, the punishment of death, which
b the worst form of punishment, is inflicted upon all, how va-
rious soever may be their grades of guilt.

Justice would dictate that, if death were the highest penalty
of the divine law, it should not be inflicted on all with indis-
criminate severity. No criminal code of human origin awards
capital punishment to every offender — from the traitor that
would enslave hb country, down to the smuggler that evades
the payment fit a trivial duty ; from the bloodstained pirate,
down to the dissipated youth- who disturbs the peace by a mid-
night revel. Such levelling severity would be deemed the
grossest injustice. With such severity, however, do universal-
ists brand the goveminent of the blessed God. The infant that
has never lisped a syllable sinks under the agonies of death*
The child, whose sins have not risen to the size and enormity
of the sins of manhood, is punished also with death. Those
who have advanced to the meridian of life, disclosing to the eye
of God additional guilt at every ste{>— are punished with but
the same severity. And the pged offender, who has grown

79 The Weapons of [Jui-t

gray in sin^ whom neither mercies nor misfortuqes can reclium,
who devotes the venerable influence of advanced life to the
corruption of the young, suffers nothing worse than death. Is
there then no difference between the faint dawn of sinfulness,
and the vivid brightness of mature iniquity ? between the ten-
der blossom and the mellow fruit of sin ? between the hesitating
air, the uneffaced blush of childish guilt, and the insolent port
and vaunting air of experienced wickedness ?

It is true that in some instances the agonies of death are
comparatively light. Sometimes, indeed, they are but momen-
tary. But this mitigation of punishment, granted, as it often
is, with no regard to justice, is only a confirmation of the charge
of partiality. The meek and patient Christian, whose life has
been a public blessing, often experiences a more direful and
prolonged conflict with the king of terrors, than the most worth-
less votary of vice. Even the tjhild who has scarcely begun
to walk in the path of sin, is convulsed on a death bed with
throes which lacerate the parents' heart, while the vilest miscre-
ant, by public execution or by suicide, is hurried into eternity
almost without a struggle. Would not this be partiality of the
most glaring description, if universalism were true ? Is the
heaviest penalty recognised by this system thus enforced with
no just regard to age or character ? What could be more glar-
ing injustice ?

2. According to the system of universalism a similar specifi-
cation of the charge of partiality against the Most High is to be
seen in the infliction of the punishment of remorse. The stings
of conscience are pronounced by the friends of universalism an
important part of the retribution to which men are condemned
in this world. . The compunctions of remorse are inflicted on
men with no just reference to character.

Behold the gav libertine, who scruples not to destroy the
peacQ of virtuous iamilies, yrho glories in deeds that plunge the
victims of his ensnaring arts- into the lowest depths of degrada-
tion, whQ moves in society like a pestilential sirocco, spreading
around him a polluting influence, leaving the imprint of vice
and infamy wherever he treads. Observe the gay indifllerence
with which he proceeds in his pathway of crime. Does be
feel the agonies of remorse ? Question him upon the subject
and he will smile in scorn at your simplicity. His moral sensi-
bilities have been long benumbed. Remorse is a stranger to
his bosom. He has reached such a prc^ciency in wickednes,

1838.] IJhiversalism Reversed. 73

that he can proceed from crime to crime with umruffled com-
posure* Nay, he plumes himself upon the skill with which he
makes havoc of the morals and the happiness of his deluded
victims.

Turn next to an humble Christian whose life b stained hj no
immorality. For a season he is overwhelmed with sorrow*
What ha3 led to the distress you witness ? What cause has
covered his face with sadness ? What secret agony preys upon
his «oul ? The cause of his grief is one which he would rather
conceal within the sanctuary of his bosom than drag out to pub-
lic observation. He has detected within himself a diminished
interest in the word of God, the fervor of bis prayers may have
given place to cold formality. The business or the fascinations
of the world may have engrossed his attention unduly, or he has
felt the workings of an unsubdued spirit of resentment* The
cause which seems to his watchful piety so loudly to demand
tears of contrition has not been discovered by bis bospm friends*
And while to the observer's view his life presents the charm of
christian consistency, he weeps and mourns before God over the
secret offences of his inward life. Nor does he wear the aspect
of peace and- gladness till the assurance of pardon and favor
from his God has relieved his heavy heart. In one hour does
he experience more distress than the conscience of the hardened
libertine would inflict in an entire year. Is then the humble
Christian, who mortifies every sinful desire, more guilty than
the. bold transgressor who gives a loose rein to his worst pas*
9ions ? If not, why does he endure the coropuiA^tions of re-
morse in such a disproportionate degree ? If men are punished
only in this life, and if, as is alleged, remorse is a fearful part of
the sinner's punishment, why are the compunctions of the vicious
so trivial as to be no availing obstruction of their pleasures or
their crimes, while the conscientious Christian quivers with ap-
prehension, upon the neglect of the slightest .duty ? Here is a
strange disregard of justice which universalism does not explain*

3. The partiality of the Ruler of the world b evinced also,
according to universalism, in the happy removal of the wicked
from earth to heaven, while righteous survivors are still subjected
to many sorrows.

The more profligate a man becomes, the more does he shorten
bis life. According to an inspired proverb, the wicked do not
live out half their days. They die and are borne to heaven, if
universalism may be credited. Having finished their course

Vol. XII. No. 31. . 10

74 The Weapons of [JtJLT

witb joy, having run a' race of glaring iniquity, baving contended *
not against the enemies of the soul, but against the cause of
holiness and the servants of God to the Ust' moment, having
won the crown of public infamy, having become meet for an in-
heritance with the devil and his angels, {hey are ushered by the
ministering spirits to the abodes of the blessed. The glories of
heaven beam around them ; the bliss of heaven fills their
bosoms; the Holy X)ne lavishes upon them the warmest com-
mendations. But where are the miserable survivors, the devout
men whose peace they loved to disturb, whose piety they loved
to deride, whose beneficent plans they loved to emlmrrass ?
They are doomed to remain in this vale of tears, to breast ad-
ditional opposition from the replenished ranks of the enemies of
godliness. They must weep and struggle for many a tedious
year before the time of thehr release shall come. They may
yet outlive another annoying generation of the ungodly before
they can be discharged from their earthly imprisonment.

Thus the antediluvians were hurried from a life of insufferable
wickedness to a heavenly home ; and as they looked down fixmi
heaven, with what feelings did they observe the faithful Noah
as he pursued his lonely voyage over a buried world ? With
what emotions did they witness his subsequent misfortunes ?
They could thank God that they were now safe and happy in
heaven, while the inmates of the ark were doomed to spend on
earth additional years of perplexity and sorrow. Is this justice ?

According to universalism, God shortened the lives of. die
men of Soaom and removed them prematurely, or rather by a
fortuftate providence, to the abodes of the blessed. At'the same
time he prolonged the existence of the faithfiil Liot under
the most painful circumstances. The unhappy man survived
the destruction, or rather the salvation of his daughters, the
mournful, or rather happy end of his wavering wife, the loss of
his property and the ruin of his town. Was it an equitable
procedure to transfer the vile inmates of that polluted city from
earth to heaven, while the aged Lot was left to roam in desola-
tion and grief, a wanderer on earth ?

Was it just to doom the fevored Israelites to a prolonged life
amid the burning sands of the desert, while their pursuers, the
Egyptian host, were relieved from the work of malignant perse-
cution and transferred to heaven ? In a few minutes the latter
were drowned, and then their happiness was complete — ^for forty
years the Israelites bore the sufferings of a sojourn in the desert.

1838.] IMv^ioHsm JHeversed. 7$

Let a man serve God with pious care> and in ordinary cir-
cumstancesy be. will outlive the abandoned voluptuary* His
piety will be rewarded by a long exclusion from the ioys of
heaven. He must stay on earth till he has seen his fondest
hopes crgshed a hundred times ; he must endure separations
that will wring his heart ; he must live till be becomes an incum-
brance to his friends^ till he stands a solitary trunk, stripped of
its branches, bowing and trembling under every blast ; he must
endure neglect ; he must witness the unconc^led avidity of
eager heirs to gain possession of h^ property ; perhaps he out-
lives his reason and remains a helpless wreck, and his dotage
exhausts the patience of all around him.' At last death removes
the superannuated burden from the world.

Let a profligate young man rush into vicious excesses. In a
fit of inebriation^ or in the hope of concealing crime he commits
a murder ; the laws of the land doom him to die. Or in other
words, a kind providence thus favors him with a speedier dis-
charge from the woes of earth. Instead of dragging out a long
life, he is borne to heaven, ere he has attained mature age. He
IS blessed with an earlier release from the perils and vicissitudes
of earth than the pious man. But where is the equity of this
procedure ? In all such instances universalism charges the
Almighty with a flagrant disregard of justipe.

We do not aflirm that the righteous always outlive the wicked,,
but if they do, the fact funrfshes ground tor the charge of par*-
tiality, upon the principles of universalism.

4. Sometimes the most holy men have been persecuted bitter-
ly by the enemies of religion. This may be specified as an ad-
ditional impeachment of the divine justice as it, is expounded
by universalism.

Why were the primitive Christians loaded with every indig-
nity and subjected to every outrage ? Why did the blood of
martyrs flow ? Why did the groans of persecuted Christians
ascend bom the stake '^ with the smoke of their torments 7" It
was because they were righteous, and their oppressors wicked*
They were punbhed with death in its worst forms. The per-
secutors survive to enjoy the blessings of prosperity. If there
be no iiiture retribution, if the oppressor may inflict the most
cruel tortures upon the servant of Christ and still enjoy the ordi-
nary share of earthly happiness, if the martyr and the relentless
monster who chained him to the stake must meet at length
under the same canopy of divine favor, if the oppressed and the

76 TAe Weaptms of [Jult

opprf'ssor, with no future adjustment of- their doings before the
bar of God, must stand on the same level, where is the justice
of the Holy One ? If retribution is dispensed only in this world,
here is partiality of the most glaring description.

5. Sometimes men ate removed into eternity in the very act
of atrocious wickedness. According to the system of univer-
salism this is the most palpable form of partiality in the gov-
ernment of the world.

. An instance of this kind has been already mentioned. The
Egyptians, while pursuing the oppressed Israelites were en-
gulfed in the Red Sea. The pirate has perished in the act
pf inflicting death upon' peaceful men. The highwayman has
been slain by the armed traveller. The adulterer has fallen a
victim to the vengeance of an injured man. It is said that
three robbers had been successful in seizing a rich booty. One
of their number was sent to a neighboring town to obtain a
supply of provisions. His companions resolved to murder him
on his return, that they might secure for themselves the whole
of the booty. Their cruel resolution was carried into effect.
Previously to his death he had poisoned the food which he was
sent to purchase— ^for the purpose of becoming sole proprietor
of the plundered wealth. His companions suspecting no danger,
partook of the provisions and died. Thus all were cut off in
the very act of atrocious wickedness.

In such cases, when are the perpetrators of crime punished ?
Not in the future world, if we are to believe universalism ; not
in this life, for they die in the very commission of glaring crimes.
And yet we are told that in this world men do receive accord-
ing to their deserts ? How is justice administered in cases of
this description 7 When are those who die in the very com-
mission of crime punished? or do they pass with all their guilt
to the courts of heaven ? . *

Say not that these cases are rare. Happily thb is the fact.
How comes it to pas? that any such instances occur under the
government of the all-wise God? Are not such instances so
many specifications of glaring partiality ?*

Should the governor of the State detect but a few men in
the commission of murder, br rape, or forgery — should he shield
them by all the power of executive patronage from the grasp of
justice— should he advance them to the highest stations of in-
fluence, the glaring injustice of the procedure would call forth
the most tumultuous excitement. Universalists themselves

1838.] VhwenaUtm Reversed, 77

would reprobate such a wanton outrage upon the rights of so-
ciety. And does the Holy One welcome to the embrace of
bis love the blood-stained murderer, who has been slain in the
commission of crime, or the foul libertine who has perished by
the hand of an injured man ? He does, if universalism may be
credited.

The view of apparent irregularities like those that have been
mentioned thus far, has driven men to the belief of future retri-
bution. They have seen that unless a future tiibe for the ad-
justment of such proceedings should arrive, the divine character
would labor under the most unhappy implications. They have
believed, as the Bible teaches, that the time will come, when
the delayed retribution will be awarded to the evil and the good,
with exact impartiality. God has appointed a day of judgment
in which the transactions of this life will be closely scrutinized,
and when every man shall ^' receive the things done in his body
according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.*'
yniversalism, in rejecting this scriptural truth, dispenses with a
doctrine which has seemed to the servants of God and to the
world at large the only explanation of the apparent disregard of
justice in the government of this world. The friends of this
. system are obliged to prove merely from what is developed in
this life, that God is just. They are not at liberty to leave per-
plexing difficulties to be explained by the unfolding scenes of
the future world. All punishment, according to their system, is
inflicted in this world. . The reality of a day of judgment they
deny. They must either question the justice of God, or explain
in some satisfactory manner the glaring instances of partiality
which their system discloses in the administration of Jehovah.

Until universalism can account for the deviations from recti-
tude which her system brings to light in the providence of God,,
we must affirm that upon the principles of this system the Holy
One is guilty of glaring partiality — that he is not '' righteous in
all his ways and holy in all his works.''

U. Universedism involves a charge of incompetency against
the Sovereign of the world.

. The Almighty has established laws by which men are to be
governed. He has affixed penalties which may be supposed
the most suitable that infinite wisdom can devise. According
to the spheme of universalism, the penalties are faithfully en-
forced ; every man, it is said, ^' is punished to the full exient of
bis guilt.

78 Th$ W^gpom of [Jui<r

How does the administration of Jehovah sucoeed ? Wivat is
the state of the world 7 Does the govemmeDt of the Eternal
inspire sufficient awe or sufficient love to save men from incur-
ring the penalty of the law 7 Where is the man that has been
restrained effectually from sin 7 There is not an instance of
undeviating rectitude in our world. All have sinned ; all do
sin, and all are punished. There is not one of our race who
escapes the penalty of the law as it is explained by univer*
salism.

The civil government that could not wield sufficient influ-
ence to keep any of its citizens from becoming felons, would
be deemed singularly weak. If all the inhabitants of our land
were, at sdme time of their life, the inmates of a prison, you
would infer that there must be some glaring defect in the slruc-
ture of the government — either that the laws are unwise, or
that the execution of them fails of answering the desired pur-
pose. Universalism would bring out to view a similar defect •
in the divine government. It contemplates no future day of
reckoning, when the unpunished and unpardoned offences of
men are to be visited with ample retribution. It makes all men
sufibr in this world, and only in this world, according to their
desert. It contends that God enforces. faithfully the penalties
of his laws. Under an administration so effective, what do we
witness 7 Every inhabitant of our world becomes a malefactor,
and is punished. There is none that does not become, at some
time of his life, an inmate of the universalist's hell. The great
mass of the human iamily must be imprisoned over and over
again, as long as they live. Some persons, if we may judge by
their misfortunes, seem never to remain out of this prison. Why,
if a civil government could not sustain itself without covering
the land with prisons and immuring within their walls all its
subjects, from the chief magistrates down to the humblest child,
at intervals, would it not be deemed miserably weak 7

According to our views, the penalty of the divine law is not
enforced in this life ; its full infliction is reserved for a fiiture
state ; and at last an immensely large proportion, saved by the
atonement, will escape the penalty of eternal death. The gov-
ernment of God will accomplish its benign purposes without
the enforcement of threatened suffering on every mortal. It is
so eflfettive as to recover lost sinners to the love and service of
a holy God. Whereas according to universalism, none escape
punishment; all are fiilly punished in this life. Nor do they

1836.] Vtmeriolum Reversed* 19

seem to be beodfioially afiected by this severity* The goyern-
ment of Jehovah, it seems then, is too \veak to save any of the
race ; all sin, and all are punished ; and they sin and suffer pun*
isbment as long as they live, are imprisoned and then set at
liberty to be imprisoned over and over again in the reputed hell
of this world's misery. Thus we are taught to regard God
chiefly as the jailer of the world. Though he is vigorous in the
extreme in the discharge of this unpleasant office, his prisons
are continually filled, and yet the earth remains the same abode
of universal depravity.

Let it not be replied here that universalism teaches the final
salvation of all men, and that it provides a remedy for all exist-
ing evils in the divine administration. If sin is punished only
in this world, future salvation can be no remedy for the ills m
our present state. The doings of this life are to have no bear-
ing upon the future. Such is the singular admission of uni-
versalism, (Whittemore's Notes on the Parables, p. ^54.) In
forming our estimate then of the divine government, we must
limit our views to its results in this life, and here, as we have
seen, we witness weakness and inefficiency. The* administra-
tion of the Almighty is more unsuccessful than the administra-
tion of any human ruler, if we must credit universalism.

The legislators of antiquity deemed it unwise to propose lawa
without enforcing their penalties by the fear of future punish-
ment. It is the opinion of statesmen that human laws cannot
be sustained without the aid of a belief in future punishment.
Even Napoleon would not dispense with this aid among the
means by which his government was administered. But uni-
versalism makes the Ruler of the world so unwise as to dbpense
entirely with the threatening of human punishment. If her
statements were true, the all-wise God might improve his ad-
ministration greatly if he would only learn from human sagacity
to restrain mankind by the fear of niture punishment.

The penalty of punishment in this life nevor has restrained
men to any great extent. Whether it be threatened by God or
by man, it is not sufficient to ameliorate essentially the charac-
ter of our race. Universalists themselves show that all the hell
which they suffer in this world is but an inconsiderable evil.
For although confident that they shall be happy after death, they
evince no eagerness to leave a world where the sins of men are
rigorously punished. They like their prison. Its confinement
18 not intolerably irksome. They are not anxious to depart and

80 The Weapons of [Jvur

be with Christ, as Paul was. We have known some of their
number to be extremely unwilling to die, and wish earnestly to
stay longer on earth, to stay in the only place of punishment
which they believe to be known in the dominions of the Al-
mighty. Why should they wish to linger in our world, if it be
a hell, and the only hell, as they assert, unless they begin to
find that their doctrine is false, since it charges God with such
incompetency as can never dbgrace the government of the
Eternal.

III. Universalism conjticU unth the benevolence of Qod»

We, who believe the doctrine of future and endless punish-
ment, are accused of dishonoring God by adopting the most re-
volting conceptions of his character. Especially are our views
.^aid to conflict with divine benevolence. ^We believe that our
conceptions of divine goodness, when stripped of the hideous
drapery which our opponents are pleased to hang around themi
will be found to accord, not clash with the inspired assertion,
*^ God is loye." We are charged with denying the goodness
of God. Those who differ from us claim at least to entertain
more, expanded views of the divine benevolence than we do.
Are they sure that their sentiments involve no impeachment of
the goodness of the Almighty ? This is a point on which they
<express themselves with much warmth, sometimes in a strain
that denotes the most sincere desire to show forth the praises of
the Liord, sometimes with a hectic glow and a severity of ex-
pression that betokens more doubt than conviction of the alleged
superior belief in the benignity of God.

We wish not to say in return the hard things that have been
^d of ourselves. Our sentiments teach us to render good for
«vil, blessing for reviling. We shall not then retort upon our
iissailants the charge that their doctrine supposes God *' to de-
light in cruelty." But. we shall attempt to show that univer^
^alism involves heavy charges against the benevolence of the
Deity.

1. The fir^t specification we would make of this charge is,
that if the doctrine of eternal punishment be not true, its preva-
lence is irreconcileable with the alleged goodness of God, for
we cannot suppose that he would suffer mankind to be deluded
and afflicted as they have been by the dominion of a cruel error
down to the pre3ent time.

If the heart of our Heavenly Father turns with instinctive
horror from the mere conception of the future and endless pun-

1838.] UmvenaUtm Revened. 81

isbmeDt of an impeniteDt sinner — ^witb as much more averskm
than iiniversalistt feel — as he is greater and more benevdent
than man-^it is not a strange inference that be would not suffer
his children on earth to be tormented by the fear of future pun-
ishment. His goodness certainly would not suffer him to play
thus with theiir apprehensions. He would soon relieve a sufibr-
ing worid from such a horrible delusion as the doctrine in ques-
tion seems to the universalist.

What is the fact ? Has the doctrine of the endless punish-
ment of unforgiven sin been disowned or favored by the Father
of men ? Has it been unifi^rmly rejected by Him on whose
character it is said to reflect most unhappily ? And have the
generations of men lived in happy ignorance of this cruel de-
lusion ? And was it reserved for some vile misanthrope to
broach the false and pernicious sentiment as late as our own
cen£ury ? The doctrine of the eternal condemnation of the im-
penitent sinner has been more or less dist'mctly believed in every
age of the world. Examine the tenets of the principal systems
of religion that have prevailed among men, and you find a di&^
tinct avowal of belief in future punishment ; in some, of endless
punishment. Examine the dictates of conscience and the natu-
ral apprehensions of men. Do they declare that no punishment
awaits the sinner beyond the grave ? . Their unwarped verdict
accords with the Bible. They teach men to expect future wo.
They suggest " a fearful looking for of judgment." It is not
till men bdve been schooled out of their original impressions by
patient effort that they deny the doctrine of future punishment,
except perhaps, in the case of those who have been reared under
the influence of erroneous belief, in whose breasts veneration for
parental wishes and established prejudice may be expected to
control the natural suggestions of the heart. The most of uni*
versalists have held originally the belief which they now reject.
Even their testimony once concurred with the teachings oi un-
prejudiced conscience.

Before the coming of Christ the doctrine of future and end-
less punishment prevailed among Jews and Pagans. This is
admitted by Dr. Hartley a zealous defender of universal salva-
tion ; who believed it tq be a general tradition, and who adnuts
that it has been ^* the doctrine of the Christian world ever since,
some very few persons excepted." (See Dr. Hawes's Tract
on Universalism, p. 3.)

Why is it the deep seated sentiment of the mind that sin
Vol. XII. No. 31. 11

The Weapom of [Jvi.r

must be punished hereafter. This convicdooy as aucient as the
world, whether we trace it to tradition or tb Ae natural sug-
gestions of the mind, comes from God. If it be a false seoti*
inent, how can its existence and prevalence be reconciled with
the alleged goodness of tlie Lord ?

The doctrine of future and endless punishment has been most
distinctly believed by those who have enjoyed the instructions
of inspired prophets and teachers. The men who have been
authorized by divine inspiration to teach the way of salvation,
have conveyed the belief that this doctrine is founded in truth.
Have prophets and apostles then taught what they were not in-
structed to teach ? Were they commissioned to make known
the doctrines of universalism, and have they taught the oppo-
site doctrines so distinctly, that the whole christian world
*^ some very few persons excepted," have been grievously mis-
led ? Was it incompetency, or dishonesty, that made Christ
and the apostles teachers of error? Teachers of error they
were in fact, if universalism be true — for their instructions have
established the belief that sin will be punished forever.

Will it be said that they were incompetent teachers, that
while they believed the truth of universalism, they were not
able to defend and explain it to the satisfaction of their hearers,
and that in spite of their most vigorous exertions the prejudices
of the world remained unshaken ? If the defenders of imiversal-
ism assumed this position, and thus claim for their leaders more
talent than fell to the lot of the Saviour and his apostles, how
will they vindicate the goodness of God ? Why did not a be-
nevolent Deity raise up in former ages prophets and apostles
who could teach universalism as distinctly and intelligibly as
Balfour and Ballou ? Why was the valuable discovery that
revelation teaches universalism postponed to our own time ?
Why was not the 61*51 promulgation of Christianity entrusted to
men who would perform their work in a less bungling manner
than incompetent apostles are supposed to have done ? The
same benignant Providence that has blessed the world with the
instructions of modern preachers of universalism, could have
easily raised up men of equal talents in the first age of Chris-
tianity.

Will it be said that the prevalence of our doctrine is to be
traced to dishonesty in the first teachers of Christianity ? That
divine goodness made ample provision for the promulgation of
the truth, and that the agents to whom the work was committed,

1838.] Vhwersalism Reversed. 83

were not true to their trust ? This is a grave charge; Were
Christ and his apostles base deceivers ? Did they conceal the
messages they were sent to teach, and substitute doctrines per-
fectly at variance with universalism ? What motive could have
prompted them to withhold the sentiment that sin will meet
with no future punishment, and teach in its stead the stem
doctrine of endless misery ? It is impossible to assign any reaspn
for a measure like this. Why did they persevere in teaching
error when they gained nothing but persecution, and when they
had only to announce the welcome doctrine, that sin will not
be punished hereafter, to become the favorites of the world ?
Surely they were not dishonest teachers. They did believe
what they taught. Did they then receive their instructions
from God? Did he impart the doctrines that have prevailed in
the world ? The universalist says the doctrine is not true. Has
the Almighty then sanctioned error ? If so, where is his benevo-
lence ?

If he has not sanctioned the teachings of the apostles, why
did be not send more successful teachers — ^men who could teach
universalism as distinctly as modem preachers do ?

The God of nature may withhold some of the discoveries of
science, for centuries, without incurring the suspicion of a want
of benevolence. It has not been essential to the welfare of
the world to know, from the beginning of time; whether the
earth or the sun is the centre of our planetary system, or how
vessi^ls may be propelled by steam, or railroads constructed.
But the truths of religion are essential to our welfare. The
universalist claims to go far beyond others in his conceptions of
divine goodness ; he contends that his doctrine is the needed
remedy for human misery. Will he explain then why it is that
a merciful God entmsted this remedy to agents, who were so
incompetent or so unfaithful as to substitute for this blessing the
poison of error and torture a suffering world with the doctrine
of future punishment ? Why divine benevolence did not impart
sooner the vaunted specific ? Why the doubts and fears of men
were not removed entirely fifty centuries ago ?

It is the favorite representation of the universalist, ^^ If God
be endowed with benevolence, he desires the salvation of all
men. If omnipotent, he is able to save all. The doctrine of
endless misery denies then either the power, or the benevolence
of the Almighty ?" Not to dwell upon the sophistical nature of
this argument, we would contend that it may be retorted upon

84 T%e Weap&m of [Jult

the UDivenalist. If universalism be the grand remedy for the
errors and miseries of mankind, the benevolence of God must
have inclined bim to make it known in every past age, and over
the whole earth. If God be omnipotent, he is able to execute
bis desires — ^then he must have made all men, in all ages, uni-
versalists. The recent origin of universalism, by this sort of
argument, disproves either the benevolence or the' power of the
Almighty.

S. But universalism conflicts still more decidedly with the
benevolence of God. It strips his character of all clemency.

Clemency consists in the remission of deserved punishment
It is no clemency to remit punishment that is unmerited ; this is
mere justice. Now, what deserved penalty is remitted by the
Almighty, according to universalism ?

Is it future and endless punishment ? This the system de-
nies to have been our desert. This penalty, we are told, is
unrighteously severe, and cannot constitute the penalty of the
divine law. It cannot be contended then that it is clemency to
save us from a doom which we have never deserved, and to
which we have never been exposed.

We are not to be told here, that Christ died to save sinners.
Christ did not die to save men from undeserved perdition.
The atonement must not be brought in thus as a mere make-
weight in the system of the universalist. If it were unright-
eous severity in God to threaten eternal ruin as the penalty of
the law, it were no mercy toprovide an atonement by which
to save us from such ruin. This were cruel mockery, not di-
vine compassion. The Son of God would not trifle with men
by claiming the merit of surprising clemency, when to have
failed to save us would have proved the sheerest injustice.
How then is the clemency of God displayed ? From what
does divine mercy save men 7

Universalists are shocked at the doctrine of future punish-
ment.* They labor hard to explain away those passages of
Scripture which announce a future judgment and the 6nal con-
demnation of sinners. They assert that no punishment is to
be feared after death. They admit with us that God has ex-
pressed for our race the most adorable compassion. They, as
well as ourselves, believe the frequent and strong professions of
clemency which the Lord has recorded in the sacred volume.
We can unite in extolling the mercy of God. They will ex-
claim with us, in the liveliest admiration '^ God is love.''

1838.] Dnkenditm Reverfcd. 8S

'When we admire the clemeocy of Heaven, we mean that
clemency which sares us from the woes of bell. We adore
the grace that can rescue lost sinners from a perdition which
they deserve. We can exclaim with rapture, ^^ thanks be un-
to God for his unspeakable gift." We can look upward, with
observing angels, to the stupendous height, and downward to
the jansearcbable depths of that love which ransomed guilty
men from the woes of an eternal imprisonment. We behold
here, as we imagine, a topic that ought to call forth the grateful
raptures of every heart.

According to the system of universalism, however, our rap-
tures are wholly unnecessary. As there is no endless perdition,
there can be no future salvation. Suppose it. were possible to
prove that we have not been ransomed from eternal ruin. We
cannot blot from the Scriptures the glowing records of divine
goodness. The universalist cannot deny while he receives the
Bible, that we are said to be under the highest obligations to the
Son of God, that the clemency of heaven is said to have made
unparalleled exertions to save our race — that God claims from us
the most rapturous gratitude for the actual exercise of surprising
meroy.

Where is this clemency seen ? From what does the Son of
God save men ?

It must be only from evils in this world, if we credit the as-
sertions of the universalist. From what earthly evils does the
Son of God save men ?

Let it be recollected that it is a doctrine of universalism, that
men suffer in this world according to their deserts, and thus en-
dure the penalty of the law. It is not from punishment on
earth then that we are saved by divine mercy. Punishment
we are said to suffer literally and fully. Universalism makes
God as unrelenting as the severest task-master. According to
this system, he inflicts without mitigation and without mercy
the entire penalty of transgression. He is held up to our view
as an almighty Shylock, who stands over the sinner with un-
yielding sternness, unwilling to abate in the slightest degree the
demands of justice. We know that universalism professes to
regard Christ as a Saviour, but, at the same time, with glaring
contradiction, it avows that we are punished as much as we
deserve in this life. Here then is no room for the services of a
Saviour. We cannot be punished by justice and saved by mer-
cy at the same time. The convict, who serves out his time of

86 The Weapons of UniversaKsm Reversed. [Jdlt

conBnement in the cell of a prison, obtains his discharge as an
act of justice, not of mercy. To offer him pardon, after he has
suffered the full penalty, is to insult and wrong him.

The mercy of God saves us from no punishment in this
world, according to universalism. From what then does it
save us ?

When the force of this representation is felt, the reply usually
is, that we are saved from sin.

There is an important sense in which Christ saves his for-
given people from the power of sin. But this is not what the
universalist means, when he says that we are saved from sin.
If the phrase '* to save us fix)m sin" mean any thing, according
to his system, it must mean to save us in such a sense from the
power of sin, that we do not become sinners. In this sense
Christ does not save us from sin. If we say that we have no
sin, we deceive ourselves. All sin, and all suffer more or less
the consequences of sinning. From what then does the Re-
deemer save us ? We are not saved from future punish-
ment, or from punishment in this life, or from our sins. We
are saved — ^froni nothing. Does the alleged clemency of God
then expend its vast energies in doing nothing ? Does prophe*
cy, from the beginning of time, pour its multiplying and bright-
ening rays upon a stupendous effort of divine mercy that is to
prove at last nothing but a splendid bubble ? Does the pro-
jected scheme of man's redemption kindle the piety and animate
the lyres of ancient prophets ? Does it awaken thrillino; inter-
est among the heavenly hosts ? Does the Son of God, at
length, descend to an expecting world ? Is the tragedy of re-
demption brought to its mournful close ? Is it pronounced that
the vast and eventful work is finished ? Does the scene excite
the most intense interest among angelic spirits ? Does the tri-
umphant Redeemer ascend again to heaven to receive afresh
the praises of the universe — and is this all for nothing ? Are
the reiterated promises and the glowing appeals of the New
Testament grounded upon nothing ? Is the extolled clemency
of heaven nothing but an empty name ? It is, if universalism be
true.

It is justice, not goodness, to enforce rigorously the demands
of law. According to the tenets of universalism, there is no
remission of sin, no expiatory atonement, no grace, no clemen-
cv. If men obf y, they are rewarded as an act of justice ; if they
sin, they expiate their own guilt by enduring the fiill amount of

1838.] MUnonary Sckoob. 87

punishment. And yet this system claims the merit of showing
ibrth to a surpassing extent, the glory of divine benevolence !

The favorite appeals of the friends of this system might be
retorted upon themselves in greater number. We have re«
stricted ourselves to but three points, the justice, the compe-
tency, and the benevolence of God. The length of the article
admonishes Us to bring these remarks ' to a close. We shall
conclude with expressing the hope that the continued existence
and spread of universalism will attract more than they have yet
done the attention of the friends of truth, and elicit from them
such countervailing exertions as will save our flocks through the
divine blessing, from the encroachnients of this moral gangrene*

ARTICLE V.
MissioNARt Schools.

By Rev. Rufoi Anderson, D. D., one of the Secretariei of the American Board- of Coiii<-

mtMioners for Foreign Miuioni, Boston.

It is thought by some, that modern missionaries among the
heathen give too much attention to schools, and that they da
this at the expense of time which ought to be devoted to the
preaching of the gospel. There may have been something to
justify this opinion in a few of the missions, especially in their
earlier stages. In general, however, the impression is probably
a mistaken one ; at least in respect to the missions with which
I am acquainted. The misapprehension may be owing to twa
causes. First, in the annual reports of missionary societies^
the statistics of education are usually given more in detail and
With greater precision and prominence, than those of preaching
— a result not easily avoided. Secondly, the precise object of
education, as a part of the system of modem missionary opera-
tions, appears not to have been generally understood hitherto
by the community. Perhaps I ought to add, that its proper
object has not always been well understood by the directors of
missions. What this ob^ct is, will be explained in the sequel.

The proportionate attention given by missionaries to schools,
18 by no means as great as many seem to suppose. Those wha
attended the last annual meeting of the American Board of

88 MBmanary Sckoob. [Jult

Commissioners for Foreign Missions, will remember tbe resoIC
of inquiries on this subject there proposed to tbe Rev. William
Richards, of the Sandwich Islands mission. It appeared that
not only was the average attendance of natives on preaching, at
the fifteen stations of that mission, greater than it is in any oae
considerable district of our own country, but that the mission-
aries preached oftener than b here customary among the settled
pastors. And in general, tbe missionaries of that board among
the heathen will bear comparison, in respect to the frequency
of their preaching, with their more zealous brethren in the pas*
toral office at home. And the same is no doubt true of tbe
missionaries of other societies.

Still it is admitted, that schools constitute a prominent part
of the system of modem missions, and that there is no evidence
of their having formed any part of the missions prosecuted by
the apostles. The inquiry therefore is very natural and proper.
Why this departure from apostolical usage 1 To this inquiry
the present article is designed to furnish a reply.

Our first object will be to ascertain the extent of territory
tmbraced by the apostolical missions.

The inspired history gives no information that the apostles
and their companions extended their personal labors beyond the
Roman empire. Fabricius has collected from tbe New Testa-
ment the names of all the places there noentioned, at which they
planted churches, some forty or fifty in number ; and also tfate
names of the different countries which they are said to have
visited.* These countries were Judea, Syria, Asia Minor,
Macedonia, lilyricum, Greece, Italy, and the islands of Cyprus
and Crete, with several others of less note. Mesopotamia
should probably be added, on the strength of 1 Pet. 5 : 13. All
the principal districts or provinces of Asia Minor are named in
the Acts of the Apostles. The parts of Arabia in which Paul
spent several years, are supposed to have been adjacent to
Damascus, and within the modem Syria ; and there is no evi-
dence in Scripture that this apostle actually made bis contem-
plated journey into Spain. The whole territory, therefore,
traversed by the apostolical missionaries, so far as the Scriptures
inform us, was within the Roman empire, and formed but a part
of it; and, so far as territory is concerned, but little more than

* Fahrioii Lux Evan, ezorieni, etc. p. 83.

1838.] Missionary Schools. 89

was afterwards governed by the eastern or Byzantine emperors.*
If we inquire what further light ecclesiastical history throws
on this subiect, we shall not be able greatly to extend the
travels and labors of the apostles. Mosbeim gives it as the re-
sult of his researches, that " the stories often told respecting
their travels among the Gauls, the Britons, the Spaniards, the
Germans, the Americans, the Chinese, the Irtdians, and the
Russians, are too recent *and fantastic to be received by an in-
quisitive lover of the truth." " A great part of these fabulous
stories," he continues, " were got up after the days of Charle-
magne ; when most of the christian churches contended as ve-
hemently about the antiquity of their origin, as ever the Arca-
dians, Egyptians and Greeks did." Dr. Murdock, the Ameri-
can translator of Mosheim, believes — chiefly in view of the
authorities quoted by Fabricius — that Peter, after preaching
Igng in Judea and other pArts of Syria, probably visited Baby-
lon, Asia Minor, and finally Rome ; that Paul, after his cap-
ti\'ity, visited Judea, Asia Minor and Greece, and returned to
Rome, but did not proceed further westward than Italy ; that
John, after remaining many years in Judea, removed to Ephe-
sus, where, excepting the time of his banishment to Patmos, he
remained till his death ; that Jatnes the younger (the elder
James was put to death by Herod) spent his life in Judea ; and
that Andrew probably labored on the shores of the Black
Sea near the modern Constantinople, and perhaps in Greece.
" Philip," be adds, " either the apostle or the evangelist, is
reported to have ended his days at Hicrapolis, in Phrygia.
Thomas seems to have travelled eastward, to Parthia, Media,
Persia and India. Bartholomew took perhaps a more south-
em course, and preached in Arabia. Matthew is also reported
to have travelled east, in the Modern Persia. Of Simon the
Canaanite, nothing to be relied on can be said. Thaddeus,
Lebbeus, or Jude the brother of James, the authorof an epistle,
is reputed to have preached at Edessa, in the north of Syria.
Of the companions of the apostles — ^Timothy, after accompany-
ing Paul many years, is said to have been stationed at Ephesus,
where he suffered martyrdom under Domitian or Nerva. Titus,
another companion of Paul, is reported to have been stationed
in Crete, where he died. Mark, or John surnamed Maik, at-

* The countries mentioned Acts Sh 9 — 1 1 ; add Media and Parthia
to the above named.

Vol. XII. No. 31. 12

90 Missionary Schoob. [Jvlt

tended Paul and afterwards Peter, and probably preached the
gospel in Egypt. Of Luke, little can be said, except that be
accompanied raul, and wrote the book of Acts and a Gospel.
Of Barnabas, nothing can be said worth relating, except what is
learned from the New Testament. — From this account, imper-
fect as it is, we may conclude that the apostles and their com-
panions scarcely extended their labors beyond the boundaries
of the present Turkish empire."* •

To the countries, then, which are mentioned in the New
Testament as favored with the missionary labors of the apostles
and their companions, ecclesiastical history adds Egypt, South-
ern Arabia, Persia, Media, Parthia, and India. But we have
nothing that throws light on their manner of proceeding in these
countries. For information of this kind, we must look solely to
the missions described in the New Testament. These were in
Syria, Asia Minor, Macedonia, Greece, Italy, and the islands of
Cyprus and Crete. I say Crete, for although we have no. ac-
count of the labors of the apostle Paul in that island, we have
his epistle to Titus, instructing him bow to proceed in his mis-
sion to the Cretans. — I omit Judea, as being the source of the
missions, and not a heathen country.

Our next inquiry relates to tJie state of education in these
countries.

The mere mention of Syria, Asia Minor, Macedonia, Greece
and Italy, isenough for the reader of history. What were they
in those times but the very foci of civilization ? Where were
other countries in the wide world, to be compared with them in
this respect ? And the time, too, in which the apostolical missions
were performed, was it not in the palmy age of Roman literature ?
But though the evidence of the high state of general civilization
and individual intelligence in those countries at that period, is un-
questionable, it is not easy to show precbely what means of ed-
ucation were possessed by the people at large, nor to what extent
the multitude was actually educated.

Two events must have exerted a powerful influence on the
minds of men and on the tone of education throughout the field
traversed by the apostles ; — viz. the general dispersion of the
Greeks, with their language and philosophy ; and the general dis-
persion of the Jews, with their inspired books and their religion.

* MoBbeim^a Eccl. Hist. vol. 1. p. 55,56 — Abie.

1838.] MUsionary Schools. 91

The Macedonians, upon the conquests of Alexander the
Great) planted their colonies everywhere. They built Gre-
cian cities even in Media. '' On the Tigris, Seleucia was princi-
pally inhabited by Greeks : to the southeast was the magnifi-
cent Ctesiphon ; and to the northwest was Sitace. Babylon
imitated Macedonia; in its neighborhood lived Greeks and
Macedonians. From thence along the Euphrates upwards lay
Nicephorium, a Grecian city, surrounded also by other Greek
towns ; and further on in Mesopotamia was Charrae, a settle-
ment of the Macedonians. But not to enter into details, we re-
fer (in Appian) to a large catalogue of cities in Further and
Hither Syria, which were reckoned to the Greeks. Tigranes,
the Armenian, in his march to Phenicia by way of Syria, de-
stroyed no less than twelve Greek cities. Between Syria and
Babylonia we meet with the ruins of Palmyra, on which are
found more Greek than Palmyrene inscriptions. Even some
written in the Palmyrene character, are nevertheless in their
language Greek. In Hither Syria, on the boundaries of Pales-
tine, and in Palestine itself, the Greeks, as was natural from the
situation and neighborhood, made still greater intrusions.^' An-
tioch, the capital of Syria, was peopled by its founder with
Greeks and Macedonians, and acquired a reputation for Greek
refinement and science. Tyre and Sidon adopted the Greek
language. Caesarea was peopled chiefly by Greeks. Gadara
and Hippos, on the east of the Jordan, became Greek cities, and
the former possessed men learned in Greek science. So also
did Gaza, a city on the southwest border of Judea. Philadel-
phia, east of the Jordan, is still majestic in its Grecian ruins. In-
deed the country east of the Jordan, was towards the north Greek,
and towards the south mostly in possession of the Greeks.*^

In this manner were the Greek language, manners and insti-
tutions generally diffused. As early as the time of Cato, that
language was understood and spoken throughout the civilized
world. Homer was read in Persia, and it is supposed even in
India. In Carthage navigators described their voyages of dis-

* Hug CD the prevalence of the Greek language in Palestine, etc.
Bib. Repos. Vol. I. pp. 536 — 550. Prof. Pfannkucbe, in his diner-
tation on the prevalence of the Aramean language in the same coun-
try in the time of the apostles, restricts the use of the Greek to nar-^
rower limits. Bib. Repos. Vol. I. pp. 317— d6a The reader will in
cline to the views taken by Prof. Hug.

ta Missionary Schooh. [Jolt

covery, and Hannibal wrote a history of his wars, in the lan-
guage of the Greeks.* " Graeca leguntur," says Cicero, " in
omnibus fere gentibus." During the reign of Augustus, the
study of the Grecian philosophy was so generally prevalent,
that almost every statesman, lawyer and man of letters was con-
versant with the writings of the philosophers. This philosophy
originally embraced all inquiries about the nature of God, the
origin and destiny of man, and the phenomena and powers of
the material world. Afterwards the consideration of physical
topics was to a great extent excluded. Socrates, as is well
known, exerted his influence to direct the investigations of phi-
losophy to subjects in morals and religion, and in social and po-
litical economy. It is no doubt true, that comparatively few
of the people knew anything of the difliecent sects of Grecian
philosophy, yet the fact that their disciples were so generally
dispersed, must have had no small influence on the minds of men. f
A consideration of the schools and the public libraries which
are known to history, will assist our impressions as to the state
of education in those large cities, in which were the recorded
labors of the apostles and their associates. Athens for many
ages had been renowned for her schools ; and though at one
time these were removed to Alexandria, and at another suffer-
ed much in the conquest of Greece by the Romans, yet they
revived, and were resorted to from all quarters by those who
were eager for learning. They even survived the incursion of
the Gauls in the fourth century, and continued to flourish till
after the time of Justinian. In the period under consideration
they bad rivals at ApoUonia on the western shore of Macedo-
nia, where Augustus finished his. education, not far south of II-
lyricum and Dalmatia ; at Rhodes ; at Pergamus, where was
one of th^ seven churches ; at Tarsus, the birth-place of Paul ;
and especially at Alexandria in Egypt. The law school at
Berjnus, in Syria, was of a subsequent date ; and the schools
of Antioch, Smyrna, Caesarea, Edessa and Seleucia, were of
christian origin, and arose after the death of the apostles. The
christian school at Alexandria was opened in the latter part of
the . second century. But the school of pagan philosophy in
that city, at the era of our Saviour's advent, was thronged from

* Schlegel's Hist of Literature, Vol. I. p. HI.

t E^henburg's Manual of Class. Lit. translated and edited by ProC
Fiske ; and Enfield's Hist, of Philosophy.

1838.] Mimmary Schools. 93

all quarters, and is said to have sent forth eminent pliilosophers
of every sect to distant countries. The celebrated library at
Alexandria needs no description. About one hundred and fif-
ty years before Christ, Pergamus contained a library of 200,000
volumes, rivalling the collection of the Ptolemies. Before the
era of our missions, Mark Antony had presented it to Cleo-
patra, to replace the one in the Museum, which had been de-
stroyed by Julius Caesar during the siege of Alexandria.

As to the influence of the Jews in their dispersion, it may be
remarked, that as long ago as the reign of Ahasuerus, or Ar-
taxerxes Longimanus, they were found in considerable num-
bers in all the provinces of Persia. The evidence of this is in
the book of Esther. At the commencement of the christian mis-
sions, this people were dispersed over the Roman empire. The
geographer Strabo, quoted by Josephus, says, " The Jews have
already passed into every city ; nor were it easy to find any
place in the world, which has not received this nation and been
occupied by it." Strabo flourisiied in the Augustan age.
At that time, the antiquities and sacred books of the Jews be-

Sn to attract the attention of pagan scholars, and conversions
^m paganism to Judaism wei'e not uncommon. Synagogues,
composed in great measure of proselytes, existed in many of
the Grecian cities. Schools are said to have been common
among the Jews ; and no one can doubt that this dispersion of
the Jews must have had a great effect on the gentile mind.*

From all this it would seem, that education and knowledge
must have been considerably prevalent in the countries where
were the missions described in the New Testament. Especial-
ly is it almost certain that men of education would be found in
those cities generally, in which they gathered churches. Some
of them would already be among the proselytes to Judaism,
and it is highly probable that these would occasionally embrace
the christian faith. The apostle Paul does indeed say, that
" not many w ise men after the flesh" were called. By these he
may perhaps have meant the philosophers. It was, however,
then no doubt much as it is now. In every city where con-
verts were multiplied, there were a few from the less proud and
ambitious classes of educated men. These would be superior
to most of the apostles in respect to mere learning, and some-
times, it may be, quite equal to Paul himself, the best educa-

\

* Eschenburg's Manual, etc p« 283.

94 Missionary Schooh^ [Jult

ted among the apostolical missionaries. In point of fact, the
standard of education among the Gentiles, in Sjrria, Asia Minor,
Greece and Rome, was at that time higher, than it was among
the Jews, and the amount of education was greater.

1 am now prepared to state some facts, iUtistrative of the
apostolical missions, which are important to the main object of
this discussion. One of the most prominent of these is, the
small number of missionaries sent by the Holy Ghost into the
several heathen countries. The New Testament gives no evi-
dence that more than three apostles visited Asia Minor. If we
call in the aid of ecclesiastical history, we have but four. To
these add Barnabas, Luke, Mark, Silas and Apollos, and there
are but nine missionaries in all. Timothy was a native of the
country. So was Titus ; at least he was a Greek. The list
of the seventy disciples now extant, which would make nearly
all the Christians named in the Epistles to be missionaries sent
from Judea, is rejected by ecclesiastical writers as fictitious.
But even if this list were authentic, it would then appear that
not more than a dozen missionaries were sent to the countries
of Asia Minor ; and, excepting Syria, no other country appears
to have been so much favored in this respect.

Now we are told that Paul and Barnabas, in their missionary
tour through Asia Minor, " ordained elders in every church."
Whom did they ordain ? Sixteen cities are named where there
were churches, and passages might be quoted from the Acts
and Epistles, implying that a far greater number of churches
were planted. Paul also informs Titus, that he had left him in
Crete, among other reasons, that he might ^^ ordain elders in
every city." Whom ? Not men sent for the purpose from
the churches of Judea. Not missionaries. The elders thus oi^
dained were chosen from among the native converts themselves.

Such was the usage of the apostles. They preached the
gospel. Converts were multiplied. ThesQ were embodied in
a society, and one or more of their number best qualified by
talent, education, or miraculous gifts, or it may be m all these
ways, were ordained over them in the Liord.

Now, in what manner did the apostles obtain, in every city,
men qualified for such a trust ?

It appears that their missionary labors, so far as they are re-
corded in the New Testament, were in the best educated, and
in some respects highly educated, portions of the world ; that

1838.] MUmnary Schools. 95

they were chiefly in cities, and, excepting Rome and a few
others, in Grecian cities, including most of those which were
distinguished for learning and general civilization in those times;
that in most, places they must have preached more or less to
educated men, rendering it not improbable that some of these
were among their converts ; and that these men, with some
special instructions in the knowledge of the gospel, would be
fitted to preach the gospel and take the pastoral charge of
churches* During the three years Paul spent at Ephesus, and
the year and a half he labored at Corinth, he might have train-
ed numerous candidates for the ministry. Wherever the apos-
tles went preaching the gospel, they found mind in that erect,,
intelligent, reasoning posture, which is the result of civilization
— a more learned and refined civilization even, than existed in
the communities from which the missionaries themselves pro-
ceeded.

It would seem, however, that whatever was the amount of
education in the communities favored with the labors of the
apostles, it was impossible to supply the gentile chusches pro-
perly with teachers, without a miraculous agency; for, in these
churches, the Holy Ghost saw fit to put forth a supernatural in-
fluence to raise up prophets, teachers and governors, that they
might the more speedily and efifectually be built up in the faith
and order of the gospel.

On this subject, Mosheim gives his opinion as follows : —
"As there were but few among the first professors of Chris-
tianity, who were learned men and competent to instruct the
rude and uninformed on religious subjects, it became necessary
that God should raise up in various churches extraordinary
teachers, who could discourse -to the people on religious subjects
in their public assemblies, and address them in the name of
God. Such were the persons, who in the New Testament are
called jpropAc^*. Rom. 12: 6. 1 Cor. 12: 28. 14: 3, 29. Eph.
4: 11. The functions of these men are limited too much by
those, who make it to have been their sole business to expound
the Old Testament Scriptures, and especially the prophetb
books. Whoever professed to be such a herald of God, was
allowed publicly to address the people ; but there were present
among the hearers divinely constituted judges, who could by
infallible criteria discriminate between true and false prophets*
The order of prophets ceased, when the necessity for them
was past." ♦

* Moebeim's Eccl. Hist. Vol. I. p. 83.

96 MUsianary Schoob. [Jvht

But Neander is more explicit in some admirable passages in
his " History of the Planting and Progress of the Christian
Church under the Apostles," translated from the German by-
Professor Robinson for one of the early volumes of this work.*
Tlie passages to which I refer contain the views entertained by
that eminent ecclesiastical historian concerning the nature and
operation of the gifts of teaching and prophecy. He believes
both of these endowments, as well as the gifts of tongues, mir-
acles, signs and wonders, to have been above the course of na-
ture. The teachers he understands to be such persons as had
been in some measure prepared, by a previous culture of the
receptive and communicative faculties of the understanding, to
develop and communicate that, which the illumination of the
Spirit revealed to them, in a connected series of doctrinal in-
struction. Their christian knowledge, according to Neander,
they '^ acquired for themselves through a self-agency quickened
by the Holy Spirit — a self-agency which developed and wrought
into form the truths perceived by them through this divine il-
lumination. The prophet, on the contrary, spoke as be was
impelled by the might of sudden inspiration at the moment ;
yielding to a sudden elevation of his higher self-consciousness,
to a light which here burst upon him, he spoke according to a
revelation. Hence the two gifts of teaching and prophecy
might be possessed by the same person. In many moments of
inspiration, the teacher might rise into the prophet. In such a
state of mind the prophet uttered incidental and powerful ad-
dresses for the awakening, exhortation, warning, and consola-
tion of the church ; or such addresses to those who had not
yet embraced the faith, as might serve to arouse their conscience
and so prepare the way in their minds for the instruction of the
didaaxakog^ It is manifest, what an influence this power of in-
spired discourse, which wrought so especially upon the feelings,
must have had at this period for the spread of the gospel.
There came often into the congregations, persons, who only
wished once to s^e what was done in the christian assemblies ;
or who only wished to become acquainted with the christian
doctrine, of the divine character ot which they were by no
means convinced. In these assemblies there now stand forth
men, who testify with overwhelming power to the corruption of
human nature and the universal need of an atonement ; they

• Bib; Repof. Vol. IV. pp. 941—377.

1838.] Miisionary SchooU. 97

speak from the depths of their own religious and moral con-
sciousness to that of the other, as if they could read it to the
bottom. The heathen feels himself stricken in conscience ; bis
heart is as it were unlocked before him ; he roust acknowledge
what before he could not believe/that the power of God is with
this doctrine, that it dwells among these men.*

'^ If now the connected instruction of the didaaxaXog, teacher,
served to lead on to further knowledge those who had already-
embraced the faith ; or further to uphold them in the intelligent
consciousness of that which they had received in the faith ; it
was in like manner the province of the ngoq>rjttia, prophecy, to
bring over to the faith thase who were not believers ; or, in
those who were already in the faith, to quicken anew and
strengthen their faith, and stir up anew in them the life of
faith."

Another passage, which I extract from the same author, re-
lates to the aisceming or distinguishing of spirits^ which was
also a supernatural gift among the gentile churches of the apos-
tolical age.

^^ The christian life,'' he says, ^' was to be allowed in the
church to develop and declare itself with freedom. Whoever
felt an inward impulse, was permitted to speak in the assem-
blies of the church ; but self-possession was to accompany in-
spiration side by side ; and it was from this very circumstance
that the latter was to be known to be genuine. No one was
permitted to speak alone and exclusively ; no one was to inter-
rupt another .f If now Paul held it to be necessary to give
such directions, it follows, that he by no means recognized the
prophets in the church to be such untroubled media or organs
of the divine Spirit, as not easily to mingle the divine and hu-
man together. Against the prevalence of such an intermixture
and the delusions flowing from it, if that which was human and
impure were given out as the inspiration of the Holy Spirit,—
against this the churches were to be protected by a trying of
the spirits, in the exercise of a gift bestowed on individuals for
this special purpose." J

Neander is of opinion that the ''word of knowledge" and the
'' word of wisdom"^ were distinctions in the gift of teaching ; —

• 1 Cor. 14: 25. t 1 Cor. 14: 30—32.

} 1 Cor. 14: 39. 1 John 4: 1. § 1 Cor. 12: 8.

Vol. XII. No. 31. 13

98 MUsionary School. [Jitlt

the one referring to '^ the capacity ibr unfolding the
doctrine theoreticMy in its constituent parts ;" the other refer-
ring to ** the capacity for applying it practically to the particu-
lar relations and circumstances of life."

The gift of church govermnent ("governments," 1 Cor. 12:
28) Neander explains as a special talent quickened by the Holy
Ghost, designed to qualify individuals for the station of officers
in the church. These were called nQtafivugo^, presbyters^
elders, or iniantono^ overseers ; both names referring to one and
the same office, and both synonymous. It was such the apos^
ties ordained over the churches they gathered among the
Gentiles. The gift of helps be understands as having refers
ence to the various services required in administering the affiurs
of the church, as the superintendence of alms and the care of
the sick ; and to this class probably belonged the giftof misacu-
ious cures.

In respect to the gift of tongues^ this writer follows the mode
of explanation now common among his countrymen, regarding
it as designed solely for the benefit of the possessor. His views
are founded upon 1 Cor. xiv. Our view of it, in common with
that generally entertained by Christians in this country and
Great Britain, is founded on Acts 2: 11. We regard the en*
dowment as designed to enable the first missionaries and the
prophets and teachers in the different churches to instruct others
who spoke languages foreign from their own.

" The gift of foreign tongues," says Mosheim, " appears to
have gradually ceased as soon as many nations became enlighten-
ed with the truth and numerous churches of Christians were
everywhere established ; for it became less necessary than it
was at first. But the other gifts, with which God favored the
rising church of Christ, were, as we learn from numerous testi-
monies of the ancients, still conferred [i. e. in the second cen-
tury] on particular persons here and there."* There is reason
to think that they did not wholly cease until sometime in the
third century.

Thus were the apostolical churches among the heathen fur-
nished with religious teachers and guides. The apostles (ex-
cepting Paul) after spending three years in the most intimate
connection with one who spake as never man spake — ^in a school
for which any candidate for the ministry would gladly exchange

* Moaheim, vol. I. p. 125.

1838.] Mimanary School 99

Che most &vored of the halls of science — ^were wondrotisly en-
dowed by the Holy Ghost with miraculous gifts and graces.
Paul, pre-eminently the apostle to the Gentiles, spent his youth,
probably, in the schools of Tarsus, but completed his education
at the feet of Gamaliel in Jerusalem. He received his knowl-
edge of the gospel by immediate revelation ; " for I neither re-
ceived it,'' says he, '< of man, neither was I taught it but by the
revelation of Jesus Christ." Next were the evangelists, often
companions of the apostles in travels and labors, also endowed
supematurally for the work of missions. Next came prophets,
teachers, etc., in the several churches. And these supernatu-
ral gifts appear not to have been restricted to one or two mem-
bers of each church, but, sometimes at least, were bestowed, for
mutual edification, upon numerous members, if not upon alL''^

Now we must believe that the Holy Ghost would not have
exerted this supernatural agency upon the minds of the first
Christians, had it been unnecessary. And whence the necessity ?
Why were their minds strengthened, made the subjects of a
spiritual illumination, and endowed with a facility and force of
utterance beyond the reach of their natural powers in their cir-
cumstances ? And why was this supernatural agency gradually
withdrawn, as the churches became more enlightened by edu-
cation, and able to train up. her own teachers in her schools at
Alexandria, Caesarea, Antioch, Edessa, and elsewhere ? It has
been said that the church grieved away the Spirit by her cor-
ruptions and follies. But it is iar more reasonable to suppose,
that the agency was withdrawn because the exigency which
called for it had ceased.

We now turn our attention to modem missions, and contratt
their circutnsttmces with those of the missions described in the
New Testament.

Modem missions have been sent to the Oriental churches, to
the Mohammedans, and to-K>mitting some small districts— the
pagan nations in western and southern Africa, India, the Archi-

* 1 Cor. 14: 23, ^ If therefore the whole church be come together
into one place> and all speak with tongues, v. 24, '* Jf all prophesy."
V. 26, " When ye be come together, every one of you hath a psalm,
hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation." v. 2d — 31, *^ Let
the prophets speak iioo or three, and let the others judge, if any thing
be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace. For
ye may all prophesy one by one.**

100 Miisianary Schools. [Jolt

pelago, Polynesia, and the territories occupied by the native
tribes of North America. The Oriental churches and the Moham-
medans occupy most of the countries that were the scene of the
apostolical missions. These I pass by at present, to contrast
the circumstances of the modern and ancient missions to pagan
nations.

One obvious and most important fact in modem missions to
the heathen is, that they are prosecuted in the less civilized,
and to a great extent in uncivilized, portions of the world.
What heathen nation of these times will compare with the na-
tions visited by the apostles ? India is partially civilized ; the
rest are in a state of barbarism, and most of them, except as
they have been affected by the gospel, are absolutely savage.
On the score of education and intelligence, they stand immeas-
urably below the Greeks and Romans. The aboriginal-Amer-
ican, the Polynesian, and the African nations were without an
alphabet until they received it from the missionaries. The lar-
ger nations of the Indian Archipelago have long had the use of
letters, but scarcely one in forty of the inhabitants can read,
and books of every kind are rare. Concerning India, the Abbe
Dubois is good authority, except where he speaks of Protes-
tant missions. He says the brahmins regard the sciences as
their own exclusive property, that they make a mystery of them
to the vulgar, and have always taken the greatest pains to pre-
vent their spread among other classes of men. At the same
time they have themselves made no progress in learning beyond
their ancestors of the era of Pythagoras, and stand, with the
whole body of the Hindoos, where they did two thousand vears
ago. It is worth while to add, that the sciences above reterred
to, which are the ones that in ancient times gave so much ce-
lebrity to the Indian philosophers, are astronomy, astrology and
magic* The native schook now existing in India are so un-
like those of Europe or America, and so inferior to them, as
not to bear a comparison. The Abbe says they are in the
larger towns, or within the precincts of some large- temple, and
are without method, or plan for study, or discipline, without ex-
citement for the student, or encouragement for the teacher.*

I hesitate not to advance the proposition, that mind, in all the
pagan nations, now open to missionaries, is in such a state that
the converts, without either the supernatural gifts of early times,
or the substitute for those gifts (imperfect as it may be) which

* Description of the People of India, Vol. I. p. 354.

1838.] Mimmwry Schools. 101

is found ia education, will not be fitted for the offices and du-
ties of the eiiristian church, nor to stand alone without the help
of missionaries.

They need such extraneous influences far more than did the
early converts. This is true of the nations of India ; and it is
pre-eminently true of the more barbarous pagan nations in which
the experiment of Protestant missions has been made. How
it would be in China, I do not know. A more thorough and
practical discipline appears there to be given to the mind in the
class of students called " literati," than is known to any class of
minds in India. But in the large portions of the heathen world
just named, it is impossible, without either miraculous gifts, or
education, fairly and fully to introduce the christian church, in
any one of its existing forms ; or if introduced, there is no rea-
son to believe that such churches could be sustained and flourish
without the constant presence of missionaries. They could
not on the plan of Congregationalism ; — for want of that intel-
ligence and discretion among the members, which are so neces-
sary where every man has a vote and a direct agency in the
affiiirs of the church, and for want also of men qualified to act
as deacons and committees. Even now, after all that has yet
heeh done in the way of education, Congregational mission-
aries (and the same is equally true of all others) are obliged to
exercise a governing influence in the churches they have gather-
ed very analogous to that exercised by the apostles. — ^They
could not on the plan of Presbyterianism ; — for want of suita-
ble men to be entrusted, as ruling elders, with the government
of the church. — Neither could they on the plan of Episcopacy ;
for want of men qualified to perform the duties of priests and
bbhops. Indeed, the want of well qualified teachers and pas-
tors would be equally felt, and equally fatal to success, what-
ever form should be given to the ecclesiastical organization. I
repeat ; without either miraculous gifts, or that intellectual and
moral discipline which is not ordinarily attained without more
education than is to be found in the heathen world, the native
churches, if left to themselves, would soon run into confusion,
and the institutions of the gospel would perish from among
them. One has but to study the writings of the apostolicd
Fathers to see, that even in their times — in the centre of the
civilized world, and almost in the brightest period of ancient
learning — the churches founded by the personal ministry of the
apostles, as soon as miraculous gifts ceased, and earlier, were

^02 Miitianary Schools. [July

kept with the greatest difficulty in the doctrines of the apostles.*
And we know that it took Uie church three long centuries lo
acquire even the ascendency in the Roman empire, and that
the hour of her triumph may be regarded as the commence-
ment of her decline. It would be an interesting inquiry, how
far this slow progress, (it must be regarded as slow, if we take
only the time into view,) and the early, rapid, and terrible de-
cline of the church, followed by ages of darkness, were owing
to the want of those very facilities for general education, with
which God, chiefly through the medium of the press, has fur-
nished his people in these latter days.

Not to pursue this subject, let us illustrate somewhat more
the intellectual degradation, into which the great body of the
present heathen world has fallen.

To how great an extent have all useful ideas perished from
the minds of pagan nations ! In those which make the great-
est pretentions to learning, in India for instance, the researches
of christian scholars have discovered that there is but little of
truth on any subject. Their history, chronology, geography,
astronomy, their philosophical notions of matter and mind, and
their views of creation and providence, religion and morals, are
exceedingly destitute of truth. It is not, however, so much va-
cuity of mind that we have here to contend with, as plenitude
of error ; the mind being filled with theories and systems of
geography, astronomy, metaphysics and theology, all mingled
together — ^the accumulations and perversions of three thousand
years — and all claiming the same divine origin, the same infal-
libility and authority. So that, happily, even the simplest
course of elementary instruction in schools, could not be other-
wise than a direct attack upon their felse reli^ons ; and the
overthrow of any one of their systems of learning would be a sub-
version, in their apprehension, of theological errofi and the sub-
stitution of theological truth.

But when we go beyond the limits of civilization, among the
wild children of paganism living on our western wilderness, in
Africa, and the islands of the sea, then it is vacuity of mind,
and not a plenitude, we have to operate upon. The savage
has few ideas, and those few relate to his physical experience
and wants. The relations of things escape his attention. He
sees only the objects just about him. He knows nothing of

* See Osbura on the Doctrinal Errors of the ApoBtolical and
Early Fathers, pasiim.

1838.] Mutimary Schoob. 103

geography ; nothing of astronomy ; nothing of history ; nothing
of bis own spiritual nature and destiny ; nothing of God. His
mind, if it were possible for it in these circumstances to be ex-
panded, would still be empty. It could not stand erect. It
would have nothing to support it.

The worst consequence of all this in connection with the nat^
ural depravity of the savage, is that paralysis of the thinking
power, especially on spicitual subjects, so often mentioned and
lamented by missionaries. This indisposition to thought is
well illustrated by the Rev. Lorrin Andrews, principal of the
missionary Seminary at the Sandwich Islands, in an essay on
native schoob at the islands written about six years since.* I
will quote a few of his more striking facts.

'^ The worst thing in their readingy* he says, speaking of
the natives, '^ is, that they get no ideas. I have taken great
pains to ascertain this fact, and I am convinced that ninety out
of a hundred that are called readers, hardly know that any
meaning ought to be attached to the words. Indeed a great
many think there is a kind of mystery, or perhaps magic, in
reading. Their notion is, that they must say over a word or
two, or a sentence, and then from some quarter a thought will
come to them — ^that is, when they have any thought at all. I
have spent hours at a time, in the high school, trying to make
the scholars believe that a word written on paper, or printed m
a book, meantjust the same thing as when spoken with the
mouth." — '^ liie mass of the people," he adds, '^ gain nothing
from conversation with their countrymen who are better in-
formed, as in enlightened countries, for they are all alike un-
thinking."— " It is remarkable that we are obliged to teach in •
a formsd manner many things to this people, which are easily
understood by the most illiterate in civilized countries, or which
they would find out by inference. We are called upon fre-
quently to answer questions which appear to us foolish. To
mention only one ; about three months ago, the wife of Kauwa^
one of the Society Island teachers, died ; a very respectable
and, I believe, pious woman. She died on the Sabbath day»
Some few days after her death, the question was agitated among
our Lahaina church members, whether or no she could now be
happy ? And the conclusion pretty generally, if not univer-
sally, was that she must be miserable, since the last act of her
life consisted in dying on the Sabbath ; in other words, break-

* See Appendix to the 25th Annual Report of the A. B. C. F. M.

104 Missionary Schools. [Jult

ing the Sabbath ; and as they had been taught that there was
no repentance after death, it was not discoverable at all hj
them how she could be saved. This reasoning was among the
best informed people of Lahaina, who have enjoyed almost ten
years of faithful instruction. Kaio, my teacher (in the native
language), who for thought, reflection, and knowledge of the
Scriptures stands third, if not second, in the island, was com-
pletely plizzled with the question, and came to me for a solu-
tion."

" The study of Colbum's Intellectual Arithmetic," says the
same missionary, two years later, " has done more than all other
books in teaching the scholars to think. Geography has great
ly enlarged their views of things, and added much to their stock
of knowledge. But for much mental discipline in a little space,
this little book has exceeded all others they have yet bad.
After going half way through the book, they were astonished
at themselves. When I commenced with it, they laughed at
the simplicity of the questions on the first page, and said it was
like the Child's Arithmetic* I turned over thirty or forty
pages of the manuscript, (the translation had not then been
printed), and read off several questions. They thought of them
a while, and said, nobody knows these things, they are exceed-
ingly entangled. I told them they could soon comprehend
them, if they would go straight on from the beginning of the
book. They said, perhaps so. Sometime after they had pass-
ed over the place they thought so diflScult, they asked me when
they should get to the hard questions I had formerly read to
them ? On being told they had passed over those questions
without making a mistake, they exclaimed, what fools we were !^

How very unlike the field which God has given us to culti-
Tate among the heathen, to that cultivated by the apostles and
their associates. Moreover, we go forth to our work without
their power of performing miracles, and our converts must be
built up in the faith and order of the gospel, and qualified to
stand alone and extend the triumphs of the Redeemer of men,
without those gifts of teaching, prophecy and government,
which were supernaturally conferred on the first gentile con-
verts.

Would any one, notwithstanding this vast difference of cir-

* Members of the high school, or seminary, were at that time
adults.

1888.] MUsiamrtf Schoob. 105

cumstanceSy still restrict us to the single method of oral preach-
iDg, because only that was employed by the apostles ? But
why overlook the supernatural qualifications, the miraculous
powers of the apostles ! Why overlook the supernatural gifts
conferred upon their converts ? Why lose sight of the fact that
the apostles did actually press into the service all the natural
powers they possessed, all their intellectual acquisitions, all
their gifts and graces, and all the providential facilities within
their reach, and brought these all to bear to the utmost upon
the people jto whom they were sent ? And would they not
have been grateful for more power, and greater means and fa-
cilities ? Would they not have used them if they could ?
Would not the apostle Paul, for instance, in the prosecution of
his missions, have rejoiced in such providential facilities, as
rail-roads by land ; steam-boats by water ; paper instead of
papyrus, or parchment ; printed books instead of manuscripts ;
bills of exchange, by means of which to remit the contributions
of the Macedonian and Grecian churches to Jerusalem, rather
than the necessity of sending messengers all the way thither to
carry the money ; and the log-line and compass, in that terrible
tempest when for many days neither sun nor stars appeared ?
Would he not gladly have favored the whole body of his con-
verts with the reading, as well as the hearing j of the word ?
And when laboring with his own hands at Corinth and Ephe-
sus, because he deemed it inexpedient to be chargeable to the
Christians of those cities, would it not have been grateful to his
feelings and facilitated his missionary work, if some society in
Judea could have relieved him from this necessity ?

Nothing can be more illogical, than the objection brought
against missionary schools, because the apostles established
none. How many things the apostles omitted to do, which
they would have done if they could. And how absurd to re-
strict the church of the nineteenth century to the means that
were at its command in the first. Must no use be made of the
numberless providential gifts to the church since then ? Must
no notice be taken of the subsequent changes in her circum-
stances ? Must no regard be had for the very different attitude
and relations of the pagan world towards her ? The heathen
to whom the church then sent her missions, were as well in-
structed in human science, as she was herself; now, the heath-
en are as much lower on the scale of intelligence, as the church
is higher ; and does this fact create no additional obligation ?

Vol. XII. No. 31. 14

10ft Mtnwnary Scftoob% [Jvlt

Besides, where is the diTine command to restrict ourselves to
(me mode of propagating the christian religion ? The apostles
certainly bad two. They preached ; and then, by the laying
on of hands, they instrumentally conferred extraordinary gifts
of teaching, prophecy, government, tongues and miracles on
certain of the converts.* The first we do as they did ; the
second, in the only manner withiii our power, viz., by a course
of instruction. And as the command to do a thing includes
the means which are necessary for its performance, this, being
essential to the accomplishment of the work enjoined, is also
commanded. Moreover, by what authority do we limit the
meaning of the Saviour's last command to the public, oral, for-
mal proclamation of it to a congregation ? When has it been
shown, that the apostles delivered sermons in the manner of
modern times ? — And why make adulU the only object con-
templated by the injunction ? Should the gospel not also be
proclaimed to youth and children, and the manner of proclaim-
ing it be suited to their years ? Why tie up this blessed com-
mand, so fiill of good will for mankind, to one single method of
conferring the benefit? Why limit its applicability to one
single combination of circumstances ? Is the consecrated church
the only place where the gospel can be, where it ought to be
preached ? May the gospel not be preached in an upper, pri*
vate room ? May it not be preached, in conversational tones
and manner, to a single family ? May it not be preached by the
way-side to a single traveller ? May it not be preached in the
Bible-class, and Sabbath school, and even in the week-day
school ; and .then may not the media of truth, common in such
circumstances, be employed to make it known to the youthful
mind?. I would ask, too, \iihe writing of PaiLTs Epistles was
not an act of obedience to the command under consideration ?
No one doubtd that it was ; and if so, and if a copy of bis
Epistle to the Colossians was made out for the church of the
Laodiceans,t was not the copying of the epistle in obedience
both to the letter and spirit of the Saviour's command ? And
when we, availing ourselves of the manifold copying powers of
the press, print this epistle and the other portions of the word
of God, and distribute them by thousands, is not this obeying
the command ? And when we teach the unlettered to read

* Rom. ]: 11. Acts 8: 17. 1 Tim. 4: 14. Acts 19: 6.
t Col. 4: 16.

1838.] MMMory SckooU. 107

the word of Grod for themselveSy and thus enable them to con-
fer the same ability od others, and to grow more in knowledge
and grace than they otherwise would, is not this also obeying
the command ? Yes verily ; it is intelligent obedience. For
the printing of the word of God, and teaching men to read it,
are not something different from the work enjoined. They
are not designed to open aod smooth the way ior the gospel.
They are not preparatory work. They are the very work it-
self— as much so as the conferring of miraculous gifts of pro-
phecy and teaching, or the writing of the Gospels, or the in-
spired Epistles anciently were. The schools are — if they are
what they ought to be— nurseries of piety, places and means
for the direct inculcation of gospel truth in youthful minds and
hearts. They are folds where the lambs of the flock are to
be fed.

Lest I should be misunderstood I will say here — ^what will more
fully appear in the sequel — that a due proportion is to be ob-
served in the different parts of the work. The different gifts,
like the different members of the body, though all essential to
the completeness of the whole, have their relative degrees of
importance, and should each be kept in their several places,
and each have no more than their respective proportions of
time. Preaching has the first place. It has that place at
home, and it has it and should have it abroad. It is the grand
means of operating upon the conscience and heaii. It is the
grand means of conversion. In some form or other, adapted to
the circumstances of the missionary, it should be the leading
pursuit of his life. In every mission it should be the focal

Koint, the ultimate, grand object, the final cause with the mem-
ers in all their plans.

It is time now to state, more precisely, what place education
should hold in the system of modem missions.

1. If we were to regard education simply as a convenient
meth6d of inculcating a knowledge of the gospel on minds of a
certain class, still it may properly be used by the missionary.
So far as heathen youth are concerned, it is found in practice to
be the only method of getting early access to their minds, the
only method of preaching the gospel to them. It is often the
' most direct and effectual means of bringing others, and espe-
cially parents, under the preached gospel.* The visitation and

• Acts 19: 9.

108 Missionary Schools. [July

•

superintendence of schools also gives a fine field of usefulness
to missionaries recently come upon the ground, and not enough
acquainted with the native language to preach formally to the
adults. It is almost the only tiling they can do ; and in the
larger missions there will almost always be some missionaries in
this condition.

2. In barbarous pagan countries, if we could make any use
of the press and the printed word of God, elementary schools
are indispensable. If we withhold the Bible from the pagan,
no matter how, in what respect does our policy differ from that
of the church of Rome ? I need not say that books and the
press are useless in a community which cannot read.

3. Ages of experience in protestant Christendom have shown,
that connecting a small system of schools with the stated and
frequent preaching of the gospel, is wise as a means of increas-
ing the effect of preaching and the durability of its influence.
And if it be so within the bounds of Christendom, why not be-
yond ? The ministry throughout the world, acts under one and
the same commission, and is governed by one and the same
code of laws. The gospel they preach is the same. Human
nature, with which they have to deal, is the same. If the cir-
cumstances differ, as they do very greatly, the difference only

I shows the greater need of connecting schools with preaching

' among those;, who know not the gospel. The ordained mis-

sionary will indeed engage no more than is necessary in their
elementary instruction. He will commit this as soon as may
be to native teachers. But when occupying a fixed station, he
will no more be without such schools than the pastor at home,
and no more will he withhold from them his fostering care, and
watchful guardianship. The missionary who has these schools
around him, and the missionary who has them not, will do well
from year to year to compare their respective congregations,
and the results of their preaching. Let their native churches
! also be compared, and their prospects among the rising genera-

tion.

4. After all, we cannot undertake to educate the youth of
the whole heathen world, nor even any considerable proportion
of them. The labor and the expense are both out of the ques-
tion. Whatever it may be proper or desirable for us to do, in
a general point of view, the scantiness of the means placed at
the disposal of missionary societies renders it expedient, yea
unavoidably necessary, that schools at tlie expense of such

1B38.] Missionary Schooh. 109

cieties be established on a limited scale. We can educate only
the few, and they must educate the many. Our pupils, as far
as possible, should be select, and selected witH some regard to
the ulterior employment of the roost promising of them as help-
ers in the mission. Our schools should be model schools. They
should be nurseries of teachers. They should be introductory
to the higher seminary, and preparatory to it. The preached
gospel must at all events be sustained, and the number of
schools should be regulated by the means placed at the disposal
of the society, and the balance remaining of what is appropria-
ted to the mission, after providing for the support of its preach-
ing members. Still I must doubt, — if missionaries are not to be
mere itinerants, if they are to have a fixed residence and ope-
rate within the bounds of some one district, — whether the
church has any right to insist upon their laboring wholly with-
out schools ; or, in other words, without a system of means in
operation around them for rearing up native helpers and succes-
sors in their work. Do the Scriptures confer any such right on
the churches ? Do they impose any such obligation on the
missionary ? Had missionaries the power of conferring super-
natural gifts by the laying on of their hands, as the apostles and
some of their associates had, the case would be very different.

5. While I assert the legitimate use of schools as one of the
means of propagating the gospel in foreign mission^, and while
I maintain the right of missionaries to be furnished with them
to a certain extent, I would suggest a general rule in relation
to their establishment ; having respect in this rule to the aver-
age amount of funds which experience has shown may be re-
lied on by missionary societies, and the proportionate demaud
which will be made on these for sending forth and supporting
preachers of the gospel. The rule is this ; — TTiat the system

X education^ in all its parts, so far as it is supported by the
rids of the mission, should have a direct reference to the
training up of native teachers and preachers. To this, in the
smaller missions, and also in the less concentrated missions, there
must be exceptions. A liberal construction should always be
given to it. In some missions, as among the Tamul people of
Ceylon and South India, the rule itself may require a consid-
erable number of schools ; — to awaken attention, give tone to
the public mind with respect to education, furnish a better se-
lection, give importance to the subject in the view of the select
pupils, open a field for the occasional trial of their powers while
pursuing their studies, and strengthen their motives to arrive at

110 ifeEssumary Schoob. [iuisY

high attainments. Still, whatever spope is allow^ for the ex-
ercise of discretion in arranging and managing the details of the
system, there will be a great practical advantage in having the
one definite object proposed by this rule. And it is a ques-
tion, whether missions themselves ought not to be established,
organized, and prosecuted with more reference to the same end.
Are not many of our missions modelled as they should be, if
our object and expectation were to furnish a ftUl supply of
preachers from Christendom for all the nations of the heathen
world, Qow and for ages to come ; and as they should not be,
if our object be to imitate the apostles by throwing the great
amount oi permanent labor upon converted natives, and intro-
ducing what the Holy Spirit may be expected to make a self-
sustaining, self-propagating Christianity?

The plan suggested would involve a seminary of a higher
order in each considerable mission, which would receive pupils
from the preparatory schools, and conduct them through a
course of liberal education more or less protracted. These
seminaries should be commenced on a small scale, and enlarged
no faster than shall be necessary. They should combine the
college and the school of theology. The notion that instruc-
tion in the principles of human science must precede the study
of theology, is derived from the schools of philosophy, and is
not countenanced by the word of God. The plain, simple
theology of the Scriptures can be taught to youth, and even to
heathen youth, in every stage of their education. The institu-
tions should be eminently missionary institutions. The whole
course of education, from beginning to end, should be christian.
It should be no part of the object of these seminaries to educate
natives for the law, nor for medicine, nor for civil affairs, nor
for trade, except so far as this will directly promote the legiti-
mate objects of the missions with which they are connected.
The course of instruction should be planned with a view to
raising up, through the blessing of God, an efficient body of na-
tive helpers in the several departments of missionary labor — ^to
be teachers of schools, catechists, tutors and professors in the
seminariejs, and, above all, preachers of the gospel, pastors of
the native churches, and missionaries to the neighboring hea-
then districts and countries. For this purpose the seminaries
should be furnished with competent teachers, and with all ne-
cessary books and apparatus, and a press should generally be in
their neighborhood.*

* Ses a Statement of Principles, on which missionary Seminaries

1838.] Stenionary SAoob. Ill

These missionary seminaries will be as really subordinate to
the preaching of the gospel, as are the theological seminaries of
our own country. If we teach in them, and in so doing turn
aside in any degree from the formal ministry of the word, it will
be that we may multiply teachers and ministers of the word.
Our object will be the more effectually to plant those instru-
mentalities, which, with God's blessing, will secure for the
gospel a permanent footing and constant increase in heathen
countries.

Our protracted discussion now draws to its conclusion. We
should not forget, however, to glance at the claims of education
among the oriental churches. The oriental churches are the
Coptic, Syriac, Greek and Armenian, and they number about
six millions of souls. The Copts are found in Egypt ; the
Syrians, in Syria, Mesopotamia, the mountains of Koordistan,
and on the western shore of Hindoostan ; the Greeks, in Greece,
European Turkey and Asia Minor. Many of the Arabs in
Syria are of the Greek church ; and so is the Georgian nation,
living at the northern base of Mount Caucasus, between the
Black and Caspian Seas. The country of the Armenians lies
between Asia Minor and Persia, but the Armenians are a com-
mercial people widely scattered. About a hundred thousand
Maronites on Mount Lebanon, and .nine thousand for each of
the sects above mentioned, are converts to papacy. These
are relics of the churches planted by the apostles. To them
were first given the oracles of God, and from them emanated
the light of the glorious gospel which shines upon us. '^ But
in treading over again the tracks of the apostles," says the Rev*
Mr. Smith, '^ I have sought in vain for an individual that now
breathes the spirit of Jesus, unless he had borrq^'ed it from a
foreign source."* I shall content myself with affirming, that
the state of education and intelligence is much lower now, in
the countries where the oriental churches are found, than it was
in the apostolical times. Even if it were not, regarding educa-
tion as taking the place of miraculous gifts, and as our only
means of raising up teachers and preachers, it is to be number-
ed among the legitimate objects of modem missions to these
churches. The necessity for schools sustained by missionary

should be reared, in the Appendix to the S8tb (last) Annoal Report
of the A. B. C. F. Miasions, p. 151—155.

* MiaeioDary Sermons and Addresses} p. 393.

113 MUsionary Schoob. [Jult

societies, is, however, less urgent among the oriental Christians,
than in heathen nations ; and recent indications encourage the
belief, that we ras^y pretty easily and without great expense
" provoke" those churches to do far more than they are now
doing in the way of self-instruction.

Thus the case stands. Apostolical usage has been urged
upon us to exclude the use of education from our missions,
only because the immense difference in our circumstances has
been overlooked. It has been forgotten that their missions
were to the most civilized nations of the world, and that ours
(I speak not only of those to pagans) are to the least civilized ;
that theirs were to a people comparatively educated and re-
fined, and ours are to a people uneducated, and to a great
extent barbarian, and even savage ; that miraculous gifts were
conferred by the Holy Ghost upon their gentile converts, so that
the churches might be promptly and effectually supplied with
pastors and teachers, while notwithstanding the present intel-
lectual degradation of heathen nations, Infinite Wisdom no long-
•er sees it best to bestow such gifts. Thus far the comparison
is against us ; but now the tables turn. We have a knowledge
of the world such as they had not ; facilities for travelling far
exceeding theirs ; paper, printing-presses, printed books, where
ihey had only the papyrus, parchment, the written page, and
the voluminous and cosdy manuscript. In these circumstances,
so diverse from those of the apostles, why demand of us that
we use no means for publishing the gospel except what they
used ? Are not means and opportunities talents to be employ-
ed— providential gifts bestowed upon us with special reference
to the advancement of God's kingdom of grace on earth ? Why,
when the Head of the church bids tu go into all the world, and
has provided fo'r us rail-roads, and steam-boats, and the thou-
sand improvements in modem navigation, should we go on foot,
or venture out to sea, without compass, or quadrant, in some
*'ship of Alexandria?" Why, when he bids us make known
the gospel to every creature, should we depend only on the
living voice and the manuscript ? Why should we not avail
ourselves of the progress of mind, of art, of science ? Is it said,
that means are nothing in themselves, that the power which
must accomplish the work is of God, and that an extended ar-
ray of instrumentalities has a tendency to make us rely on them
and forget his power ? This is all true. But did Paul do less
because his planting was rather by itself, and God must give

1888.] Study of the Hebrew Language. . 1 13

the increase ? Did he not exert all his strength, and plafat and
water, and become all things to all men, and put into requisition
every possible means to save them ? Unquestionably he did ;
and so should we. Creation, education, gi-ace, and providence
go to make up the degree of our accountability. Still it is a
precious truth, that we are no less dependent on the influences
of t,he Holy Spirit, than the apostles were. None of our plans
will succeed, none of our efforts prosper, without his influences.
Go where we will, if the Holy Spirit go not with us, our mis-
sions, however vigorously prosecuted, will fail. Missionaries
and their directors and patrons have not felt this dependence
enough. There is no danger of feeling it too much. When
weak in ourselves, we are strong in God. But faith is not the
only grace we are to exercise. We must practise obedience.
We must act, as well as believe. Looking unto Jesus, we
must do with our might whatsoever our hand findeth to do, for
the honor of his name and the advancement of his cause on earth.

ARTICLE VI.
Reasons for the Study of the Hebrew Language.*

By B. B. Edwards, ProTeasor of HebrBw, Thoolof ieal Seminary, Andorar.

The Sixth Article of the Constitution of this Seminary pre-
scribes, that under the head of Sacred Literature shall be in-
cluded " Lectures on the formation, preservation and transmis-
sion of the sacred volume ; on the languages in which the Bi-
ble was originally written ; on the Septuagint version of the
Old Testamerft, and- on the peculiarities of the language and
style of the New Testament, resulting from this version and
other causes ; on the history, character, use, and authority of
the versions and manuscripts of the Old and New Testaments ;
on the canons of biblical criticism ; on the authority of the several
books of the sacred code ; on the apocryphal books of both

Testaments, on modem translations of the Bible, more par-

^» ■■.— ■■ I 111 ■ ■ i» - 1 ■ ■ ' ■

* This Article was delivered by the writer as an Inaugura) Ad-
dress, January 18, 1838, in the Chapel of the Theological Seminary.
It is DOW published in compliance with the wishes of some persona
who beard it

Vol. XII. No. 31. 15

1 14 Study of the Hebrew Language. [Jmw

ticularly on the history and character of our English ver-
sion ; and also critical lectures on the various readings and dif-
ficult passages in the sacred writings."

This may justly be regarded as a comprehensive and well-
condensed statement of the main points in a course of sacred
literature. It may, possibly, be considered as an uncommonly
liberal outline, if we take into account the period in which it
was framed. It would have received, however, the cordial
subscription of the earliest planters of New England.

John Cotton, the first minister of Boston, was able to con-
verse in Hebrew.* Of Samuel Whiting of Lynn, it was said,
" that he was especially accurate in Hebrew, in which primitive
and expressive language he took great delight." Of the very
first settlers of Massachusetts Bay, not less than twenty had
been educated at the English universities. The appointed
course of studies in Harvard college, at its origin, embraced
Hebrew, Chaldee, and Sy riac.f Mr. Dunster, the first presidcDt,
was understood to have been well acquainted with the oriental
languages.]: Mr. Cbauncy, his successor, was admirably skilled
in the learned languages, particularly the oriental. In bis
acquisition of the Hebrew he derived no small benefit, during
the space of a year, from the conversation of a Jew. He was
the fiiend of archbishop Usher, and had been, successively,
professor of Hebrew and of Greek, at the university of Cam-
bridge, England. When he attended prayers in the hall at

* ** Wherein this is not unworthy the taking notice of; that when
the poser came to examine him in the Hebrew tongue, the place that
he took trial of him by was that Isaiah 3, against the ezcesaive brave-
ry of the haughty daughters of Zion ; which hath more hard words
in it, than any place of the Bible within so short a compass ; and
therefore, though a present construction and resolution thereof might
have put a good Hebrician to a stand, yet such was his dexterity^ as
made those difficult words facil, and rendered him a prompt respon-
dent''— Life of Cotton by John i^Torton,

f ''The fifth day reads Hebrew, and the Easteme Tongues. Gram-
mar to the first yeare, houre the 8th. To the 2d, Chaldee, at the 9th
boure. To the 3d, Syriack at the 10th houre. Afternoone. T%e
first yeare practise in the Bible at the 3d houre. The 2d, in Ezia
and Daniel, at the 3d houre. The 3d, at the 4th houre, in Troatius
New Testament."— JVei0 EngkavPi Firtt DruUs, London^ 1643.

t It was on this account, probably, that he was employed to ** re-
vise and publish, the Bay Psalm Book/' printed at Cambridge, In
1640.

1838.] Skudy of the Hebrew Lafiguage. 115

Harvard college, in the moroing, he usually expounded a
chapter of the Old Testament, which was first read from He-
brew by one of bis pupils ; and in the evening, a chapter of the
New Testament, read from the Greek. Thomas Tbacher, the
first minister of the old South Church, Boston, having spent
' several years under the tuition of president Chauncy, while the
latter was minister of Scituate, became well-skilled in Arabic,
Sjrriac and Hebrew ; in the last named language, he composed
a lexicon.* The thesis, which Cotton Mather maintained,
when he received his second degree was " the divine origin of
the Hebrew pomts," though he afterwards saw reason to
change his mmd, and to hold to the contrary opinion to the
last. During seven years after his graduation, he prepared
students for admission to college, hearing recitations every day
in the original Scriptures, giving particular attention to the
Hebrew.

In the burying-ground in the town of Northbotough, in this
State, there b a monument, on which the following is the in-
scription m part:

''A native branch of Judah see,

Wbicb once from off its olive broke,
Regrafted from tbe living tree,
Of the reviving sap partook.**

This ^* native branch" was Judah Monis, the first regular in-
structor of Hebrew at Harvard college. He was by birth and
religioa a Jew, but embraced the christian faith, and was pub-
licly baptised at Cambridge in 1 722. The Rev. Dr. Benja-
min Colman of Boston preached a sermon on the occasion
which was published. In the preface, he remarks, that ^^ Mr.
Monis is a master and critic in the Hebrew. He reads, speaks,
writes and interprets it with great readiness and accura-
cy, and is truly didantinog apt to teach. His diligence and
industry, together with his ability, are known unto many, who
have seen his grammar and Nomenclator Hebrew and English,
as also his translation of the Creed and the Lord's Prayer, the
Thirty-Nine Articles of the Church of England, and the As-
sembly's Shorter Catechism into Hebrew."f For his Hebrew

* Wisner** Hist of the Old South Church, p. 13.

t It was voted by the corporation, April 30, 1732, ^tbat Mr. Judah
Monis be improved as an insiructor in the Hebrew language in the

116 Study of the Hebrew Language, [Jucr

grammar the corporation paid him £35. Fie made use of
the vowel points in this grammar, and insisted that they were
essential to the right pronunciation of the language. He resign*
ed his office in 1761. On the 7th of September, in the same
year, the corporation voted, " that Sir Sewall be the Hebrew
instructor in Harvard College this year." He was re-chosen in
1762 and 1763. In 1764, the Hancock Professorship of the
Hebrew and other Oriental Languages was established, from a
legacy of Thomas Hancock, an opulent merchant of Boston,
who died August 1, 1764. This was the fii-st professorship
founded in America by a native. Stephen Sewall was elected
the first professor on this foundation. His qualifications for the
office were so preeminent, that he was probably the only one
who was thought of to fill it. Besides his instructions in He-
brew and Chaldee, he was required to teach in a more private
way, such students as should desire it, in the Samaritan, the
Syriac and the Arabic. No American, previously, bad acquir*
ed so extensive an acquaintance with eastern learning as Pro-
fessor Sewall. His Greek odes were praised by the English re-
viewers. He corresponded with Kennicott and other learned
foreign orientalists. He prepared a Greek Prosody and Lexicon,
a Hebrew grammar, a Hebrew and "Chaldee Lexicon, (now in
Ms. in the library of Harvard University), and pushed his stud-
ies into the Ethiopic and Persian.

President Stiles speaks of Dr. Cutler, the second rector of
Yale College, as a " great Hebrician and orientalist." The
vehement literary ardor of Dr. Stiles himself is well known.
He would actually compass sea and land to get the sight of a
Jewish rabbi or a piece of vellum. In May, 1767, says his be-
ographer. Dr. Holmes, he commenced the study of the Hebrew.
In the first five days, he read the Psalms. In one month, he
translated all the Psalms from Hebrew into Latin. In 1768,
he commenced Arabic, Syriac, Chaldee, and Rabbinic. In
1769, he copied an Arabic volume, and translated it from the
original. He then, as he terms it, ^^ dipped into Persian and
Coptic."

college," and that his salary for one year should be £70. All the
undergraduares, except the freshmeD and such others as should be
exempted hy the faculty, were required to attend his instructions on
four days in the week. He was re-chosen in 1723, and m 1724. He
then appears to have become a permanent instructor. See Worces-
ter Magazine, 11. 180, and Peirce's Hist, of Harvard University, p. 232.

1838.] Study of the Hebrew Language. 1 17

During the latter part of the last century, however, the ia-
terest in oriental literature had greatly declined. The study of
Hebrew was not, indeed, entirely neglected in the colleges
which more recently came into existence. Professor John
Smith of Dartmouth College gave instruction in Hebrew and
compiled a grammar of the language.

The knowledge of eastern learning, possessed by the fathers
of New England, was doubtless, in some instances, curious and
ill-digested, possibly, superficial, rather than profound and prac-
tical. When we take into account, however, the ruggedness
of the times, the pressure of other and indispensable duties, and
the very imperfect lexical and grammatical helps, we cannot
but be astonished, that so much progress was made. More
attention, comparatively, was bestowed on the study of Hebrew
during the first fifty years after the settlement of New England,
than has been given to it at any subsequent period, not except-
ing the present century. No generation of biblical students
has arisen in England, which can be compared to the Ushers,
the Seldens, the Lightfoots, the Pococks, the Castells and the
Waltons of the middle of the seventeenth century. Dr. Light-
foot gave his invaluable oriental library to Harvard College.
The flame of sacred learning which rose high in their Trinity
and Immanuei, was rekindled on our wintry shores and amid
our unbroken forests. Our fathers did not avail themselves of
the common excuse — want of time — for the neglect of the
study in question. One of these venerable men, who had read
himself blind, and who was accustomed to derive consolation from
the thought, that his eyes would be opened at the resurrection
of the just, performed the duties of a laborious parish minister,
in a new settlement, and also of a teacher of youth. Another
individual, who was the pastor of an English church, a preacher
to several native congregations, and the creator of an Indian
language, did not lack time to pursue his Hebrew studies.

But it is not my intention to dwell on these interesting facts
in the early records of New England. Before proceeding to
the main purpose of this address, I wished to fortify myself
with good examples, and to show that ancient precedents were
in my favor.

I shall attempt, in the ensuing remarks, to adduce some rea-
sons why the study of the Hebrew language should be made a
part of a liberal education, and be put into the same category
with Latin and Greek. There is no adequate cause for con-

118 S^udy of the Hebrew Language* [Jvlt

fioiDg the study to a small part of one of the professions. Why
should it not be considered as the common privilege of all the
professions ? I know of but one argument against its introduc-
tion into our present courses of collegiate study ;-— they are al-
ready pre-occupied and crowded with other branches of leam*
iog. Were one or two additional years^ however, allowed to
the preparatory schools ; were the elements of Latin and Greek
thoroughly mastered at our academies, as they ought to be,
and as they are at two or three of them, an opening might be
found somewhere in the four college years for the histories of
Moses and for the songs of David. No considerate man would
dislodge the Latin and Greek classics from the place which
they now occupy. Still, Isaiah is, in all respects — ^in simplici-
ty, in fire, in originality, in sublimity — as worthy of study as
Homer. The Lamentations of Jeremiah will not yield to the
Elegies of Tyrtaeus. These things ought to be done, while
the other should not be left undone.

1 . An argument for the study of Hebrew may be derived fitxn
the fact, that great eminence in the pursuit, on the part of a
few individuals, cannot be expected in the absence of a general
cultivation of the language.

It has been argued, that we need a few men well-skilled id
the original Scriptures to serve as defenders of the fiuth when
attacked on critical grounds, while the great body of the clergy
and of the educated luty may safely neglect or but imperfectly
acquire the branch of knowledge in Question. That this general
position is untenable, it were perlectly easy to demonstrate.
Of the ten thousand, or twelve thousand ministers of Christ in
the United States, more than ten, or fifty, or one hundred, or
one thousand ought to be intimately conversant with the origi-
nal documents of their faith. Allowing, however, that a few
men, well trained as original investigators would meet the ex-
igency, still we contend, that thb small number could not be
rabed up amidst a surrounding ignorance, or a general apathy,
in relation to the pursuit. No one acquainted with the history
of the world, or with the nature of man, can entertain an ex-
pectation so fallacious.

Why is England destitute, and why has she always been
destitute, of great masters in music ? Because her people have
no taste for it. It is not taught in her schools. There is no
chord running through her bustling population, which a mighty
minstrel, rising up, could touch. It b the flight of the shuttle

1838.] Study of the Skhrew Languagei. 119

and the stroke of the bammer for which England has ears, —
none for the charming symphony that wakens raptures high.
Why has Germany produced mndel, Haydn, Mozart, Bee-
thoven, Weber, and nearly all the other distinguished original
composers of music ? Because these men could be understood
and relished all over Germany. Every peasant is a singer ;
every family is an orchestra. Her entire population is impreg-
nated with the spirit of song. It is considered to be no more
difficult nor remarkable to read and write music in the schools,
than it is to read and wpte language. This universal difiusion
of the musical taste does not cramp genius, or prevent the rise
of great men ; on the contrary, it enlivens genius, and creates
masters who become the teachers of Christendom.*

Why has France been eminent above other nations for math*
eraatical development, so that we can hardly count up her
Clsurauts, Lalandes, Laplaces, Lagranges, Biots, Aragos ?
Because mathematics have been highly honored bv sovereign
and by people, not merely in the practical applications, but in
the most abstract analyses. Her scientific men have not risen
up alone, like a single cedar on the sides of Lebanon. Multi-
tudes of young men, educated in her schools and sent forth in
her armies, have been eminent mathematicians.

Sacred literature holds out like examples. England, in the
seventeenth century, had a constellation of profound linguists.
Learned travellers were despatched to the E^t ; manuscripts
and books were collected ; oriental professorships were found-
ed ; archbishops laid out their revenues in buying coins.
Cromwell, ^^ who chose nien for places and not places for men,"
opened his republican chest. Translations, collations, and
gigantic polyglotts were the result. While the general interest
continued, eminent scholars were not wanting.

Thus it is in Germany. Her biblical scholars, who are

* ^ I always loved music ; wboeo hath skill in this art, the same ui
of good kind, fitted for all things ; we must of nieoessity maintain
music ID schools ; a schoolmaster ought to have skill in music ; otheiv
wise, I would not regard him, neither should we ordain young fellows
to the office of preaching, except they have been before well exer-
cised and practised in the school of music. Music is a fair gift of
God, and near allied to divinity. I would not for a great matter be
destitute of the small skill in music which I have. The youth ought
to be brought op and accustomed to this art, for it maketh fine and
expert people."— Irii<W# TahU TVitt, Lotidon, 1653, p. 500.

120 Study of the Hebrew Languaget. [July

known the world over, did not rise up isolated, without sympa-
thy or encouragement. All the middle and most of the north
of Europe were spectators or competitors. Hosts of ardent
scholars were pressing on behind them. They were borne up-
ward by an impulse which they could not resist. Outward
things combined with the inward resolution and contributed
fnaterially to the result.

It is not denied that there are apparent exceptions to this
position. It has been strenuously argued, that a state of seoii-
barbarism is the most favorable for eminence in some of the
fine arts, particularly in poetry. David, it has been said,
reached by one bound, the highest place in lyric composition.
Homer flourished when the' Greeks lived in caves and fed on
acorns. Yet these are not to be viewed altogether as excep-
tions. The people who had in their remembrance such strains
as the sister of Moses sang at the Red sea, such words as Mo-
ses himself delivered on the plains of Moab, such triumphal
songs as that of Deborah, by the brook Kishon, could not but
furnish many minds kindred to that of David. And it is not
certain but that Homer has collected the spoils of a thousand
preceding or contemporary bards, whose names have faded
away partly in the accidents of time, and not merely through
fais own transcendent efRilgence.

In every department of labor, men are made for each other*
They need the cheering sympathy and the generous coopera-
tion of fellow-laborers. Were there none to share the pleasures
of success, one half of its value would be wanting. A modest
man does not wish to acquire languages, that he may be stared
at as the eighth wonder of the world. Ordinarily he will have
no heart to labor, unless he is surrounded by a community who
can properly estimate his productions. What motive has be
to push his researches far beyond the point where they would
be generally appreciated ? What security, moreover, has the
church, that he will not involve himself with them in errors and
absurdities ? He needs around him the safeguard of a vigilant,
as well as the support of a sympathizing community.

2. My second argument for the more general study of the
Hebrew is, that we may be better prepared to take all proper
advantage of the immense stores of erudition on the general
subject which have been collected in Germany.

Nothing is more common, and nothing is more unfounded,
than national prejudice. The name of a Frenchman with some

1838.] Siudy of the Hebrew Language. 121

persons^ is a synonym for the want of all sound and sober
learning. With others, the common sense and the practical
talent of the Englishman are worth all the world besides.
Not a few extol Germany as the great centre of civilization —
while her neighbors are groping in twilight. On the other
hand, raaltitudes can see nothing there but cloudy metaphysics
and learned atheism. But the truth is not contained in these
omnivorous generalizations. Tbb spirit of the gospel requires
us to judge of nations with the same fundor and generous dis-
crimination which we should exercise towards individual men.
A liberal education fails in one of its most precious fruits, if it
does not lead the scholar to estimate every part of the earth in
some such manner as we might suppose a pure-minded inhabi-
tant of another world does. God has set one nation over
against another, as he has the organs of the human body, that
there might be mutual dependence and cooperation. His
national gifts are not to be idolatrously magnified, nor to be
sullenly set at nought. France needs the English steadiness
and the English wisdom. England might condescend to look
over the channel for mathematical and medical science. In the
fields of literature, the Germans are unsurpassed. As intellec-
tual explorers, they rise up by thousands. They have hardi«-
ness of body, iron resolution, patience, a sustaining enthusiasm,
a spirit of vigorous competition, a high hereditary character to
be maintained, and a learned and munificent government. In
the department of sacred philology, their researches have been
extensive and profound and the results abundant. The Hebrew
and its cognate dialects, they have subjected to searching and
discriminating examinations. Grammars and lexicons, intro-
duetrons, commentaries, geographical treatises, elaborate essays
on partfcular topics, and an almost infinite number of miscel-
laneoua compositions attest their wonderful diligence. But
these immense treasures, in order fully to meet the wants of
our community, require selection and arrangement — not simply
a transfusion into our language, but an adaptation to our modes
of thinking, to our taste and methods in illustration, to our
theological tendencies, and to our general spirit. For many of
their peculiarities as a theorizing and unpractical race, the
Germans are not in fault. Not a few of the channels of activity
are closed up against them, by their government, which may be
called a good, paternal despotism. In numerous cases, the
productions of the German press demand emendation, and puri-
Vol. XII. No. 31. 16

1^ Study of the Hebrew Language. [Jult

fication, if not an entire remodelling. We are not called upon to
augment the stores of English infidelity. The products of the
neological school may be left, as a general thing, to perish on
tbie ground which gave them birth. The writings oi some of
the principal evangelical theologians of Germany have not, by
any means, all the value which their ardent admirers attributed
to them on their first introduction to our community. Scbleier-
macher, whose life is regarded ^s an era in Germany, seemed to
have been longstrugglin§^to attain what he might havefound by
opening the pages of our Dr. Bellamy. The notions which are
generally entertained on the continent of Europe in respect to
the observance of the Sabbath, we should not wish to have
transplanted here.

With these exceptions, however, the Germans possess mines
of inestimable wealth, which ought to be opened for the benefit
of the world. They are now, comparatively, unworked or un-
known. The social and political circumstances of the German
States are such as not to admit of the employment and diffiision
of their stores of learning in a thousand ways accessible to those
who speak the English tongue. A large part, however, of their
biblical labors are unappreciable by us. To use a favorite term
of theirs, we have not reached the point of development. We
are not able to grapple with their learning, nor sympathize with
their spirit. Innumerable treatises, bearing on important points
in the interpretation of the Old Testament, remain solitary
copies in two or three of our libraries, because English ver-
sions of them could not be sold. Some of these essays would
be of essential aid to all those foreign missionaries who are
called to the office of translating the Scriptures.

Moreover, it seems to be the especial duty of the scholars of
this country to give to the treatises in question currency in the
English tongue. The few individuals in Great Britain, who
have the ability and the inclination to engage in these pursuits,
are almost wholly withdrawn to the vindication of their politi-
cal and ecclesiastical rights. Few results, comparatively, can
be expected in that country, till the civil storms are blown over,
or till the exclusive regard to what is immediately practical
shall give place to juster views.

3. The importance of the study of the Hebrew language
may be argued from its effect in strengthening the faith of the
student in the genuineness and divine authority of the Scriptures.

The Roman Catholic binds up certain apocryphal books

I 1888.] Study of the Hebrew Language. 128

with the Old Testament, But it would seem hardly possible
I for a reader of common discernment not to perceive instantly

^ that the claims of these books to inspiration rest on a very pre-

, carious basis. To render this obvious, they need only to be

read in connection with the canonical books. These latter
^ have the unstudied guilelessness, the transparency, the uniform

^ dignity of divine truth ; the former may have traces of proceed-

ing from honest and pious minds, but the dignity is not sustain-
I ed ; the simplicity is an imitation ; they contain, not unfrequent*

; ly, jejune repetitions and puerilities. Their inferiority is ren-

dered more striking by their position. Tobit would be a re«
j spectable story if it were not crowded in between Malachi and

Matthew. But placed where it is, it is brought into most unfortu-
nate proximity with the writings whose purity, decorum and
consistency indicate their higher origin. Thus our confidence
in the divinity of God's word is materially strengthened. • It
arises in part from feeling. We cannot describe the process.
Before we are aware, the perception of the difference between the
two classes of writing has become a part of our consciousness.

But if such is the effect in comparing the apocryphal books
with our excellent English version of the Old Testament, the
contrast is much heightened by examining the former in con-
nection with the original of the latter. The Hebrew has the
signatures of a simplicity and a freshness, which no translation
can fully copy, unless it be itself inspired. It is the freshness
of Iklen on the seventh morning of the creation ; it is the sim-
plicity of patriarchs and prophets ; it is the innocent guilelessness
of angels. Our translation is faithful to the sense of the origin
nal, and it will be an everlasting monument of the powers of
the English language, especially in its Anglo-Saxon features.
But it b no disparagement to the version to assert, that it does
not give us all the vitality and beauty of the original. In read-
ing the latter, we cannot but feel, that we have passed into the holy
of holies ; the proofi of divinity are thick around us. We do
not simply Tcwm that our faith in these records is firm, we feet
that it is.

We may arrive at the same conclusion in another way. The
translator must, in many cases, select one word, the best which
he can find, to express the sense of the original word. He-
cannot employ amplification, paraphrase, circumlocution. He
must take a single substantive, or a single epithet ; else he
weakens, or obscures the passage. He very properly renders.

IS4 Study of the Hebrew Language. [July

the verb n:i^ by its fifth sigDificatioo, to speak. He caanot
even allude to the other, and more primary meanings — to ar-
range, to guide, to follow, and to lie in wait. He rightly trans-
lates the noun ^jn-t^ by path or roady without even hinting that
it has also the meaning of act of going, journey, mode of living,
conduct towards God and man, religion, destiny or the way in
which it goes with any one. Thus with many other terms
which might be mentioned. The sight of the original word
will suggest to the reader, not simply the substantial significa-
tion of it in the passage, but all the related significations near or
remote. At a single glance, he has the history of the. word —
not to confuse his conceptions, but to enlarge them and render
them more vivid. A sin<rle word in 'the translation expresses
the idea of the original substantially. But to unfold the sense
in the various shades of it, in the utmost perfection, the ety-
mology of the word is, perhaps, required, or the signification
is partly contained in some other ramification from the root.
Thus there will be a vivid apprehension of *the passage. The
characters of the revelation will stand out in bolder relief. The
student will feel that be is no longer dealing with shadows ;
what he especially needs he will gain — ^not faith in its lower
forms, but -a living and enduring impression of the great reali-
ties which are couched beneath the terms which are daily com-
ing under his eye.

He will, also, attain to a more intelligent conviction of the
truth of some particular facts or doctrines. We may select,
for instance, that of the original unity of the human race.
It seems now to be fully proved, that one speech, substan-
tially so called, pervaded a considerable portion of Europe and
Asia and united in a bond of union, nations professing the most
irreconcilable religions, with the most dissimilar institutions,
and bearing but a slight resemblance in physiognomy and color.
This language or family of languages, is the Indo-Gerroanic, or
Indo-European. By further researches, it appears to be es-
tablished, that this family is connected with the Semitic, of
which the Hebrew is a dialect, not by a few verbal coincidences,
but linked together, both by points of actual contact, and by the
interposition of the Coptic, grounded on the essential structure
and most necessary forms of the three.* In the common He-
brew Lexicon, now used in this institution, whole families of

* Dr. Wiveinan's Lectures, p. €6.

1838.] Study of the Hebrew Language. 135

biliteral roots are illystrated by aDalogies from the Indo-Ger-
manic tongues, proving that the Hebrew in its primary ele-
ments, approaches much nearer both to the European and the
Southern Asiatic languages, than has been generally supposed.
Every investigation in thb field, and it is one of boundless ex-
tent and but just opened, increases the credibility of the Mosaic
history of the creation of man, and helps to confute a standing
cavil of infidelity, arising from the existing diversities in the
language, color, and physical organization of our race. The
diligent student of the original Scriptures will be constantly
meeting with unexpected and interesting discoveries, which will
afford him a satisfaction akin to that felt on the solving of some
long studied mathematical problem.

We have not space to illustrate the local evidence furnished
by the Hebrew language, in the successive stages of its history,
of the honesty of the sacred historians. When the Israelites
were in Egypt, Egyptian words were incorporated with the
language. There was a strong infusion of Cbaldeeisms, when
the people were in Babylon. Some of the later books contain
words of Persian origin. Thus the language is a standing me-
morial of the general truth of the history.

But we hasten to consider ;

4. The influence of the study of the Hebrew Scriptures oo
the imagination and the taste.

The imagination is not a modification of memory or of any
other mental faculty. It is an original quality of the mind. It
has the power of conferring additional properties upon an ob-
ject, or of abstracting from it some of those which it actually
possesses, and of thus enabling the object to react, like a new
substance, upon the mind which has performed the process.
It has also the power of shaping and of creating by innumerable
methods. It consolidates numbers into unity and separates
unity into numbers.* " It draws all things to one — ^makes
things animate and inanimate, beings with their attributes, sub-
jects and their accessories take one color, and serve to one
effect." t In its highest or creative power, the imagination
belongs only to the few great poets. But the faculty is, doubt-
less, possessed by all men, though, in some cases, it is faintly,

* See these ideas beautifully expanded and illustrated in the Pre-
faces to Wordsworth's Poetry, Boston edition, 1824.

t Charles Lamb* on the Genius and Character of Hogarth, Works,
Vol. II. p. 391. New York edition.

196 Study of the Hebrew Language. [Jult

or not at all developed. Whoever can read with inteiiigence
and sympathy a genuine poet has imagination.

*^ The grand storehouses of enthusiastic and meditative im-
agination, as distinguished from human and dramatic imagina-
tion," remarks a great living writer, ^' are the prophetic and lyri-
cal parts of the Holy Scriptures, and the works of Milton, to
which I cannot forbear to add those of SpenseTr. I select these
writers in preference to those of Greece and Rome, because the
anthropomorphitism of the pagan religion subjected the minds
of the greatest poets in those countries too much to the bondage
of form, from which the Hebrews were preserved by their ab-
horrence of idolatry. This abhorrence was almost as strong in
our great epic poet, both from the circumstances of his life, and
from the constitution of his mind. However imbued the sur-
face might be with classical literature, he was a Hebrew in
soul, and all things in him tended towards the sublime."

The poetry of the Hebrews is sometimes represented as
oriental, an eastern fashion, local, factitious, artificial, adapted
to men living a migratory life, under an ardent sky, and not
adapted to a severe European taste. But the Hebrew poetry
is no such thing. It is European ; it is occidental, for all ages
and generations ; it is universal in its character ; it is everlasting
as the affections of man. It furnishes food for that imagination,
whose birth was not for time but for all eternity. Peasants can
feel its force ; philosophers kindle at its inspiration. Strip
the Old Testament of its poetry, and it is not the old Testament ;
it contains truth, but not the truth which God revealed. Take
out of it the element of imagination, that which makes it poetry,
and the residue is neither poetry nor prose. It may be truth,
but it is not the truth which we need. No error can be
greater than to call the Hebrew poetry mere costume. There
are some truths which are poetry in their very nature. Men,
tbe world over, have imagination and love poetic truths, and
these truths were necessary for them, and, therefore, part of
the Bible is poetry.

The Arab praises tbe Koran because it contains lofty, poetic
conceptions of the Deity ; but these are the very things which
Mohammed stole from the Jewish Scriptures.

It has been, sometimes, a matter of wonder bow the poet
Dante, — arising up when tbe human mind was at its nadir, alone,
in the night of the dark ages, in Italy, in the confluence, as it
were, of the two streams of corruption and death, in the midst

1 1838.] &udy of the Hebrew Language. 137

I of petty disputes, raging civil discords, when men were burnt

to death for astrology — ^how he could pour forth numbers so-
t sublime, and at once take a position higher than that attained^

I with two or three exceptions, by uninspired poets.* But the

I answer is, that Dante bad read Moses' description of Ekien and

[ of the fall. His imagination had been fed with the visions of

I Ezekiel and of the Apocalypse.

I The highest, the grand characteristic of Hebrew poetry is,

I that it furnishes the germs of innumerable thoughts, hints, ob-

scure intimations, recondite allusions, almost hidden gleams of
imagination, out of which a great poet will erect an ode or an
epic. Isaiah had said that " Lucifer sate upon the mount of
the congregation on the sides of the north." This was enough
for Milton. From this scarcely intelligible hint, the poet threw
up a palace for his fallen angel thus :

At length into the limits of the north
They came, and Satan to his royal seat.
High on a hill, far blazing, as a mount
Raised on a mount, with pyramids and towera,
From diamond quarries hewn, and jrocks of gold.
The palace of great Lucifer, so call
That structure in the dialect of men
Interpreted ; which not long after he
Affecting all equality with God,
In imitation of that mount, whereon
Messiah was declared in sight of Heaven,
The mountain of the congregation called, etc.f

It is these almost concealed gleams of invagination, where a
common eye would see nothing, and a common imagination
would remain unaffected, — seeds of the loftiest thoughts, germs,
of the highest poetry, — which the Bible contains more than all
other books, that has fixed the eye, and kindled the concep-
tions of the great masters of the pencil. How many sublime
paintings have been suggested by the Apocalypse, itself essen-
^ tially a piece of Hebrew poetry !
^'* Besides, much of the Hebrew poetry is addressed to the

imagination in its most poetic, in its creative sense. It supplies
something other than hints. It has regular and sustained
pieces of composition in which imagination is the predominant
element, just as it is in the first two books of Paradise Lost.

^ North American Review, Oct. 1833.
t Mitfbrd's Life of Milton, I. p. 7a

128 Study of the Hebrtw Language. [July

Such are the thirteenth and fourteenth chapters of Isaiah, the
introductory vision of Ezekiel and the entire book of Nahum.
The capricious, the fanciful, the temporary are excluded. The
metaphors are indefinite in extent, yet true to nature. They
are not to be judged by the rigor of logic or of mathematics ;
but they have a science of their own, from whose rules they
never deviate. The reader who is not aware of this prevailing
element in these cotnpositions, and who cannot bring some
portion of the same element to their illustration, will not see ^>)
their beauty nor feel all their force.

Unaffected pathos is another characteristic of Hebrew poetry.

It is a singular fact, that among the almost innumerable com-
mentaries which Germany has poured forth on the various books
of the Old Testament, the writings of Jeremiah have been gen-
erally passed by. We hardly know of a good critical com-
mentary on it in any language. Isaiah receives all the com-
mendation, sometimes at the expense of great literary injustice
to Jeremiah.*^ But for true, poetic sensibility, Jeremiah is un-
surpassed. A tender and plaintive melancholy, untinged by
the least bitterness or misanthropy, is diffused through his wri-
tings. In the midst of an earnest remonstrance, or an historical
narrative, we unexpectedly meet with a stroke of pathos, which,
it would seem, he could not restrain till he had completed the
composition. Coming upon us, as it does, while we are listen-
ing to the recital of the idolatries and horrible cruelties of his
ungrateful countrymen, it is like the tones of a human voice to
a solitary traveller on a sandy and savage desert. The Lamen-
tations are an exhibition of patriotism, confidence in God, artless
and overwhelming grief, bold apostrophe, delicate personal allu-
sions and generous enthusiasm, which has no parallel. It is not
Brutus at Philippi, nor Marius on the ruins of Carthage, but it is
a venerable prophet of the Lord treading on the ashes of the
holy city and on the bones of the daughters of Zion.

In offering these remarks on the universal and imperishable
character of Hebrew poetry, we do not intend to deny, that
there are orientalisms, an eastern costume, modes of speaking and
figures of speech which are peculiar to the East. The images
of the orientals are bolder and more fiery than ours. We are
accustomed to compare man to the various olnects of nature ;
they liken external objects to man, and make all nature instinct

* See Oeaenius's Commentary on laaiab, in many plaee*.

1838.] Study cf the Hebrew Language. ISO

with life. With them science b the mother of virtue, precipi-
tation is the mother of repentance, the soldier is the son of war,
the traveller is the son of the road, words are the daughters of
the lips, and prudence is the daughter of reflection. Every
thing, even down to a letter of introduction, or to the firman. of
' the Sultan, must be in a poetic form.

In the consideration of these subordinate matters, the west-
ern student must exercise his taste, or that acquired power
which judges of the fitness or congruity of objects. As a reader
or interpreter of the Old Testament original, he will have full
scope for the exercise both of his imagination and his taste. No
ampler or richer field for their development or cultivation could
be desired.

Such cultivation and development, moreover, are needed by
the youthful evangelical clergymen of our country. In their
anxiety to become sound theologians, or skilful logicians, or in
the pressure of practical duties, they have too much neglected
the province of imagination and taste. In this respect the two
denominations more particularly connected with this institution
are, unquestionably, inferior to some other denominations of
Christians. Consequently, in not a few excellent men,
there has been an inability to appreciate and employ all the
treasures which are accumulated in God's word, lliey have
Inot availed themselves of that cultivation of the taste and of the
imagination which may be acquired by faithfully studying such
compositions as those of David and of Isaiah. There exists, in
our community, a class of highly disciplined minds that evangeli-
cal clergymen have not been able, in general, to reach. Intellect
has not been wanting, nor theology nor piety, but there has been
a deficiency in those graces of style, and in that highly cultivated
taste which are required to meet the exigencies of the higher cir-
cles in society. No man of sense would argue for what are
sometimes called tasteful or imaginative preachers. Yet, as the
powers of imagination are one of the noblest gifts of God, as their
exercise is entirely consistent with a sober judgment and with
sound common sense, and as a leading class in the community will
not be aflTected by the truths of the gospel, unless they are pre-
sented in acceptable words and enforced in good taste, we are cer-
tainly under the highest obligations to develop these powers of
imagination and of taste and employ them fully in the service of
our Lord.

5. Another important consideration is the bearing of the
study of Hebrew upon the missionary enterprise.

Vol. XII. No. 31 . 17

130 Study of the Hebrew Language* [July

The one hundred and twenty-two ordained missionaries sent
out by the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Mis-
sions, sixty-nine of whom were educated at this institution,
have published, with the aid of their assistants, between fifty
and sixty millions of pages, a large proportion of which are parts
of the Scriptures. The number ot languages employed is
twenty-nine, nine of which were first reduced to writing by
these missionaries. In all this wide department of labor, aug-
menting every year, an accurate acquaintance with the original
Hebrew is, oi course, indispensable. The missionary translator
is not to repair to the Vulgate, nor to the Septuagint, but to the
fountain head.

In the labors which are to be entered into for the conversion
of the five or six millions of Jews, scattered over the world,
the necessity of the Hebrew Bible is too obvious to need the
briefest allusion. In respect to familiarity with its pages, the
missionary himself must become a Jew.

The bearings of the subject upon those who speak the Ara-
bic tongue may Justify a moment's consideration. The great
problem for the mends of civilization and Christianity to solve
IS the conversion of the millions who use the Chinese and the
Arabic l«uiguages. Tliese enlightened and saved, the world,
comparatively, is evangelized. Henry Martyn, in speaking
of the Arabk^ translauon of the Bible, says : ^' It will be of more
importance than one fourth of all that have ever been made.
We can begin to preach to Arabia, Syria, Persia, Tartary, part
of India and China, half of Africa, and nearly all the sea coasts
of the Mediterranean, including Turkey.'' According to the
tables in the Modern Atlas, this would give upwards of two
hundred millions, who would be reached through the Aralnc
tongue. This calculation may, perhaps, appear extravagant ;
yet, if we look at the extent of the .language, with all its differ*
ent dialects, the number who use it will fail not far shon of one
fourth of the population of the globe.** Any thing, therefore,

* The t^ri/^en Arabic, or that in which tlio Koran is composed,
was the language of the people inhabiting the vast empire founded
by the successors of Mohammed. It is now the religious and liter*
ary language of the numerous nations that profess Islamism, extend-
ing from the island of Goree in the Atlantic ocean to the eastern ejE«
tremity of Africa, and from Madagamsar to the rivers Oby and Volga
in the north of Asia and Europe. The mdgar Arabic is apolten io a
great part of Syria, in Mesopotamia, in Khusiatan and Fart along the
Persian Gul^ on ihe Coroipandel and Malabar coasts in India, io all

1838.] Study of the Hebrew Language. 13.1

which will materially aid us in the acquisition of the Arabic has
a value which words canoot express.

What, then, are the relations between the Hebrew and the
Arabic ? Most intimate and fundamental. The Arabs have
a common ancestry with the Jews, partly from Abraham through
Isbmael, and partly from Heber through his son Joktan. Some
of the Arab tribes most clearly spoke the same language with
the Israelites, while Moses was leading the latter through the
wilderness* At what time there was a divergence, we are not
informed. But in numerous and. in important points, the two
languages yet remain identical.

The affinity of languages is sought by one class of philolo^ts
in their words; in their grammar ^ by another class. Accord-
ing to the former, words are the matter of language, and gram-
mar its form or fashioning ; according to the latter, grammar is
an essential, inborn element of a language, so that a new gram-
mar cannot be separately imposed upon a people. But which-
ever of these methods is adopted, in order to determine the
affinity of two languages, the result in the case before us is the
same. The Hebrew and Arabic are kindred both in words
and in grammar, both lexically and grammatically. In an
Arabic translation of the Pentateuch, about one half of the
words are Hebrew, with the same radical letters. One writer
enumerates more than three hundred names of the most common
objects in nature which are the same in both, without by any means
exhausting the list. The roots in both languages are generally
dissyllabic, lying in the verb rather than in the noun. The
two languages abound in guttural sounds. The oblique cases
of pronouns are appended to the verb, the noun, and to parti-
cles. The verb has but two tenses. The gender is only two-
fold. The cases are designated by means of prepositions.
The genitive is expressed by a change in the first noun, not in
the second. The noun and the verb do not admit of being
compounded. There is a certain simplicity in the syntax, and

Egypt, in Nubia along the whole course of the Nile from Egypt to
Bennaar, by the Arabs and Moora in all the towns of the Barbery
States and by the wandering Bedouins, in a part of Biledulgerid, in
Fezzan, in Sahara, in part of th6 kingdoms of Kordofan, Darfonr,
and of Bomou Proper, in different States on the coast of Zanguebar,
in Socotra, in a great part of Madagascar, in Malta, and in some of
the islands of the Indian archipelago. There are various dialects of
the vulgar Arabic* but they do not differ greatly from one another*
Su BaOn^M Mae Ethnograpkique dn Globe, Parte, ISSMS.

132 Study of the Hebrew Language, [July

the diction is, in the highest degree, unperiodic. In the He^
hrew Lexicon which we here daily use, almost every Hebrew
root has a corresponding Arabic one, with the same radicals,
and generally with the same signification.

In promoting, therefore, the study of Hebrew in this coun-
try, we are taking a most direct means to spread the glorious
gospel of Christ, not only where the Arabic is the dominant
language, but wherever Islamism has penetrated, that is, from
Calcutta to Constantinople, and from the Caspian sea to our
American colony in Liberia. A thorough knowledge of He-
brew will remove at least one half the difficulty of acquiring
the Arabic. It will introduce us to the same modes of writing
and of thought, to the same poetic diction, and in part to the
same material objects, the same countries — and the same his-
torical associations. In this sense, the Hebrew is not a dead
language. By its most intimate connection with the Arabic,
and, I may add, with the Syriac, it is still spoken at the foot of
Mount Ararat, on the site of old Nineveh, at Carthage, in the
ancient Berytus, and where Paul was shipwrecked. It is re-
viving in Egypt, and the Bible and the Tract Societies are
spreading its literature on the wings of every wind.

There are two other points upon which, did the time admit,
some remarks might be offered, viz. the light whrch a critical
examination of the Hebrew Scriptures might be expected to
throw on the systems of christian theology ; and on the pres-
sent increasing tendency in some portions of the church to
undervalue the Old Testament and to degrade it from any
connection with the New — thus in effect subverting the au-
thority of both ; but I forbear.

It is with unfeigned diffidence, and not without fear and
trembling, that I enter upon the duties before me. My associa-
tions in this place are those of a learner in the presence of
venerated teachers both among the living and the dead. The
course of study is, indeed, delightful — ^and fond and ardent
hopes might be indulged by one just entering upon it, yet the
experience of almost every day wam^ us that the fairest earthly
hopes bloom only for the grave. The work too is one where
presumption and ignorance have no place — interpreting the
thoughts of Heaven—- endeavoring to explain the mind of the
Holy Spirit. Yet that Spirit, humbly sought, giveth power to
the famt, and to them that have no might, increaseth strength.

1638.] Original Language ofMatthttv^s OospeL 188

ARTICLE VII.

In<(uibt kespecting the Obioinal Languaqs of Mat-
thew's Gospel, and the Genuineness of the first
TWO Chapters of the same ; with particular refer-
ence TO Mr. Norton's View of these Subjects as ex-
hibited IN his Treatise on the Genuineness of the
Gospels.

By II . Stuart, Pkof. Sae. Lit. TJiaol. Bam. Andover.

^ I. Introductory RemarJcs.

Mr. Norton has so conDected these two subjects, in his
Treatise, that it is difficult to separate the one froin the other,
and yet preserve a special regard to what he has advanced
respecting them. He supposes that the first two chapters of
our present Gospel of Matthew are an interpolation. He ad-
mits, indeed, that they have always made a part of our Greek
Translation (as he names it) of Matthew ; but he supposes
< the original Hebrew copy of Matthew to have been aug-
mented, by the addition of the chapters in question before it
was translated. These chapters,' he thinks, ^ may have been a
separate document at first ; and this being small, and apparently
constituting a natural introduction to the Gospel of Matthew,
(which originally omitted the genealogy and the history of
Jesus' infancy), they were transcribed by some copyist into one
or more Mss. of the Hebrew Original, and thus came at length
to be blended with it, and to be written in more or less of
future copies as belonging to it.' Some one or more of these
copies, thus interpolated, came, as he supposes, into the hands
of the Greek Translator of Matthew, who gave to this Gospel
the form which it now presents ; Addit. Notes, p. liii.

In the discussion of the questions before us, I shall begin
with that which respects the language in which the Gospel
of Matthew was onginally written, and then make some re-
marks on the alleged interpolation of the first two chapters.

Mr. Norton, like Campbell, Olsbausen, and some other
writers, seems to consider the question so clear in respect to the
Hebrew original of Matthew, that he declines even going into

1

194 Original Language of [Jui.t

any extended argument respecting it. He sknplj refeis to
several of the Christian fathers, who have expressed an opinion
in favour of such an original ; and then adds, that * as there is
no intrinsic improbability against this, we must believe it, un-
less we reject the testimony of all Christian antiquity.' He
moreover alleges, that 'nothing has been objected to tbb
testimony, which he regards as of sufficient foixse to justify a
protracted discussion ;' Add. Notes, p. xlv.

In terms scarcely less confident than these, does Oisbausen
express himself, in his work on the Oenuinene$s of the four
canonical Gospelsy p. 28. He even goes so far as to say :
" We have scarcely a testimony ibr the existence of Matthew,
if we deny that his Gospel was written in Hebrew." All this
is said too, by a writer who has laboured abundantly, and much
to the purpose also, to shew that Matthew's Oreek Gospel is
quoted from the very earliest times. He even lays it down
(p. 93) as incontrovertible, that < in the time of Papias,' i. e.
very little after the close of the first century, ' the Greek
translcUion of Matthew was every where current in the churA,
and constituted a^part of the canonical four Gospels.^

Another German critic, J. £. C. Schmidt, Professor of
Theology, etc., at Giessen, in his Historico-critical Introduction
to the New Testament (Giessen, 1818), in a style appro-
priate to a certain class of Neologists in Germany, declares, that
* if we do not admit the Hebrew original of Matthew, he knows
not how to prove at all that thb publican ever wrote a (jos-
pel ;' Pref. p. iv.

If assurance of being in the right oould make a cause good,
we might regard it, then, as quite beyond the reach of proba>
bility, that any doubts which are of serious moment can be
raised respecting the views which these authors, and others of
the like sentiment, have defended. After all, however, we may
with propriety say, that any question ought surely to be made
very clear, before critics should venture to assert so categori-
cally as has been done in the present ease.

It is not a fact, at any rate, that all who have studied thn
subject, and written upon it, have come to the same result as
the authors just named. If there are critics entitled to high
respect, (which I readily concede), on the list of those who
have adopted such views as Mr. Norton, yet there are othen
deserving of equal deference, who are found on an opposite
list.

1838.] MatOieu^i Goipel ^ 135

Omitting the ancient writers^ we find among modern critics
who have declared in fiivour of a Hebrew original, Corrodi,
MichaeliSy Weber, BoUen, Adler, Storr, Haenlein, Eicbbom,
Bertholdt, Kuiooel, Scbmidt, Harwood, Owen, Campbell, A.
Clarke, and Olsbausen, authors comparatively recent ; also
Simon, Mill, Cave, Grotius, Bellarmin, Casaubon, Walton,
Tillemont, Eisner, and others, of preceding times. But on the
other hand, as being in favour of a Oreek original, we can ap-

i>eal to Erasmus, Paraeus, Calvin, Lie Clerc, Fabricius, Pfeif-
er, Lightfoot, Beausobre, Basnage, Wetstein, Rumpaeus,
Hoffinan, Leusden, Masch, Vogel, C. F. Schmid, Lardner,
Jortin, Hey, Jones, Gabler, Paulus, and others. Besides these,
the leading works which have recently been written op the
literature of the New Testament, I mean the Introductions of
Hug, De Wette, and Schott, defend a Greek original.

One would be naturally prone to think, on looking at this
second list of names, that something worthy of notice may be
or has been said, in favour of an opinion adopted by men of
such a cast as these. However, as it is no part of my design
to make an appeal to auth&ritiesy in respect to a question of
such a nature as that before us, I shall endeavour to exhibit the
real state of facts in regard to it, so far as I have been able to
ferm an acquaintance with them.

^ 2. Testimony of the Christian Fathers.

First of all, let us attend to the testimonies of the cmcient
Christian Fathers, with respect to the language in which the
Oospel of Matthew was originally written. On these, great
stress has often been laid ; or rather, as I might truly say, the
question has been oftentimes assumed as decided, or frequently
been declared to be decided beyond the reach of any appeal,
by the testimonies which the ancients have bequeathed to us.

The first and most important testimony is that of Papias ;
who was bishop of Hierapdis in Phrygia of Asia Minor, and
flourished at the close of the first century and the beginning of
the second. None of his works are now extant, excepting a
few fragments preserved in quotations. Eusebius has given a
particular account of him, in his Hist. Ecc. UI. 39, and Jerome
in his Lib. de Viris Illust. c. 18. It appears that he wrote
five books, entitled Aoylmv Kvgianmv 'jE^fjyijoHg, i. e. explana-
tions or interpretations of divine oracles or sayings. Irenaeus

I

186 Originai Languogt of [Jvi«t

(ftdv. Haeres. V* 3S) adverts to these books ; and at die same
time he says : Zlanlag 'lomvpov ^i» inovetiig, noXwtagnov di
hatgog yifovwgy igxaiog iiftig * i. e. * Papiaa was a hearer of
JobD, and moreover a friend of Polycarp, a man of. primitive
times.'

The reader, however, would form, as it seems to me, quite
an incorrect opinion respecting Papias, should he make it up
merely from this declaration of Lrenaeus. Eusebius, who makes
this quotation from lrenaeus (ubi supra), immediately adds:

But Papias himself, in the proem of his book, does, not say
at all that he was an eye or ear-witness of the apostles, but
only that he learned the things which respect the Christian
fiiith from those who were the iamiliar acquaintances (roif^
fvmgtfAmv) of the apostles." The quotations which Eusebios
then makes from Papias himself, whose book was before him,
seem to me fully to justify his remark which I have just quoted.
Papias explicitly says, that he had made it a business to collect
together, as much as possible, all the oral traditions and sayiogs
to which he could have access, and which were deserving of
credit, respecting the declarations of the apostles and other
disciples of Christ ; of which latter class, be names Aristion
and John . the presbyter (o ngfajSviegog), Papias does not
seem to intimate that be himself bad access personally to the
apostles, and thus made inquiries of them ; he says expressly,
that he made his inquiries of elders who were eonversani with
aposihs — nagoixiv ngiopvtegwp xalwg efiad-ov .... nagaMoXav-
^lixoimv totgngeafiwfgoig/u e. M learned well of the elders
• . • who were conversant with the ngtofivxigoig^ which means,
in this latter case, the apostles and primitive disciples,

I have been thus particular in stating these facts, because
they enter essentially into the dispute about the credit due to
the declarations of Papias which are yet to be cited. On the
one hand he has often been represented as an apostolic man,
i, e. a hearer of the apostles themselves, and we are called upon
to give him almost the credit due to an inspired witness ; on
the other, vigorous eflbrts have been made to weaken the force
of his testimony, particularly because Eusebius calls him (III.
19), aqfodga Ofiixgog tov vow, i. e. a manof very small talentSy
or of very little compass of mind. The statement of lrenaeus
above recited, if taken in a limited sense, may, after all, be re-
garded as correct ; that is, Papias may have heard or seen the
apostle John at Ephesus, or in its neighborhood, near the close
of this apostle's life. That Pftpias was well-acquainted with

1838.] Maitkew^s OatpeL 137

Pdycarp, there can be no good reason to doubt. But that this
author^ when bis book was written which has been already
named, bad been conversant with any number of the apostles
and had derived his 'Eftiyvoiig from their oral testimony, there
is not a shadow of evidence to prove ; nay, directly the con-
trary is manifest. He does not even name Polycarp as a source
from which he drew ; at least this is not done in the passages
quoted by Eusebius. Moreover, the place in which he lived
and the time when he flourished almost preclude the possibility
of his being a fw^g^og xHw dnoatokwif.

But while we are cautioned by such circumstances as these
not to claim too much for Papias, I can not, on the other hand,
assent to what Hug and many others have endeavoured to make
out, viz., that Papias is not worthy of credit, because he was
devoted to the collection of oral traditions and has been called
a nmpUton by Eusebius. Papias himself, as quoted by Euse-
bius, says : ** I took no pleasure (ov.,. ixaigovS in such as
talked a great deal, but in those who taught what was true ;
[I did not give heed] to those who related strange doctrines,
but to those [who related] things which were added to the faith
[i. e. to the Uhristian religion] by the Lord, and which had their
origin in the truth itself." He then goes on to say, that when-
ever he met with any one who had been conversant with the
Elders, he inquired of them what Andrew, Peter, Philip, etc.,
had said. In all this, now, I do not perceive, as some writers
afiect to do, any marks of an enthusiastic and undisceming col-
lector and retailer of stories or reports, but merely the natural
and ardent curiosity of a mind deeply intent on the collection of
sayings and doings, that were connected with individuals whose
characters were highly venerated, and whose opinions were
matters of lively interest to sincere Christians of the second
generation.

But Eusebius, in the sequel, names several matters which he
found in the volume of Papias, that have respect to miraculous
things said to have taken place in regard to Philip one of the
apostles, and Barsabas or Justus chosen in the room of Judas,
Acts 1: 23 ; which, however, are nothing peculiariy strange,
provided Mark 16: 17, 18 be regarded as true. Besides these,
Eusebius says that Papias sets forth lipag xi tipag nagaftokag
TOtf .Eantigog^nal i^ittOnuXiag aritov, %ul wa SiXku fit;^«scoir«pa.
i. e., ^certain strange parables of the Saviour, and doctrines or
bis, and some other things of rather a fiibulous hue.' By ttrangt

Vol. XII. No. 31. 18

138 Original Langtuxge of [Jclt

parables Eusebius doubtless means, such as are not contained
in the Gospels. Among the fiv^ixoiTtga he names especiailj
the millennial and visible personal reign of Christ upon earth,
after the first resurrection. Eusebius, who was himself a stren-
uous anti-millenarian, then declares, at the close of these repre-
sentations, that " Papias was aqodpa afitKgog tow vovi^, if one
may venture to judge from his book."

Now here the principal ground of Eusebius' opinion respect-
ing Papias seems to be laid open to our view. First, he gave
too much credit to traditionary stories ; and secondly, he was a
believer in the millennium as understood in the grosser sense.
Both of these reasons are good ones, I acknowledge, for dis-
trust to a certain extent, viz., so far as it concerns traditional
stories with which the wonderful is intermixed, and so far as it
regards ability to interpret the prophetic Scriptures which are
highly figurative. But if every man is a simpleton^ who ex-
hibits the like traits with Papias as to credulity or ability to in-
terpret that part of the Apocalypse which has respect to the
thousand years of Christ's reign, then we might easily make
out a large list of simpletons, fit>m ancient and firom moderD,
yea, firom recent writers — ^men too of great eminence and learn-
ing in many important respects*

In a matter, then, which does not concern the wonderfidf
nor yet the mode of interpreting prophecies clothed in language
highly figurative, there appears to be no good reason why the
testimony of Papias should be any more suspected, than that of
any other well meaning and honest witness, who, on some
speculative points, would not be able to form an opinion entitled
to much consideration, but in the statement of a simple mat-
ter of fact would tell the truth without prejudice and without
embellishment. Such is the result to which our investigation
' with regard to Papias seems to conduct us ; and his testimony
may now be produced and examined to some good advantage.

According to Eusebius, Papias relates a traditionary account
which he had heard from John the Presbyter, respecting the
composition of the Gospel of Mark, viz., that Mark wrote it
down, as he had 'heard it for substance in the often repeated
preaching of Peter. Papias then passes immediately on to a
brief mention of the Gospel oi Matthew ; but he does not tell
us explicitly whether what he then relates was also received
from John the Presbyter, or not ; although, from the connec-
tk>n in which the passage stands, it seems most natural to con-

1838.] Matthew's Qoipel 139

I

t

elude, that he meaDS to be understood as intimating such to be
I the case. His words are ; '^ Matthew wrote oracles (Xoyia,

! ^accounts, narrations) in the Hebrew diakct ; and then each

I cme interpreted them as he could."*

f That by the Hebrew dicUect is here meant the language

which the Jews of that day spoke and wrote in Palestine, there
can be no rational doubt. This was a mixture of Hebrew,
Chaldee, and Syriac, with some modifications in grammar, pe-
y culiar to itself; as we know from the Jerusalem Targum, writ-

f ten not long after this period. We know this, also, from the

I few sentences of the native language of Palestine, at that time,

, which are preserved in the Gospels.

I No claim has ever been set up, I believe, for Papias as a

^ Hebrew scholar. There is no evidence, and no probability,

that he had any acquaintance with the Hebrew language. He
, could not judge, then, of a supposed original Hebrew Gospel of

^ Matthew, in consequence of any intimate personal knowledge

of the subject. From common report, or (as in this case seems
most probable) from John the Presbyter, he must have derived
this tradition. From what source John derived it, or who this
John was, or whether he had himself any personal knowledge
of the Hebrew — are questions which history does not enable us
to answer. The probability seems to be, from the name of this
Presbyter ('Makvfjg), that he was of Jewish origin.

But what is the meaning of the clause : '^ ^ch one inter-^
preted them [the narrations] as he could ?"

Of a toriiten interpretation we cannot think, even for a mo-^
ment. Had there been many such, as would have been tho
case provided we are so to understand Papias, we can scarcely
imagine that this would not have been mentioned. The sim-
ple meaning seems to be, that each one into whose hands Mat^
thew's original Gospel fell, who had any ability to interpret the-
Hebrew original, did it according to the measure of his ability^
Another limitation still must be added, in order to make out
any tolerable sense. Papias cannot be understood as referring
. to readers to whom the Hebrew was vernacular. These had

no need of interpreting a Hebrew Gospel ; for they understood
it better as it was, than they could do in the language of any
version. Papias, then, must have meant to say, that every

ptvffi f aita ig ^iwcno haeiog. Euseb. Hist. £cc. III. 39.

140 Orignud Language of [July

penoD who spoke Greek and bad more or less knowledge of
the Hebrew, made out the sense of Matthew's Hebrew Gospel
as well as he could. This would seem to imply, either that
there had been a time when there was no regular vnitten trans-
lation of Matthew into the Greek, or else that such as could
not, or did not, obtain this translation, made out the meaning
as well as they could from the original Hebrew. The latter
seems to be the more probable meaning of Papias here ; for in*
asmuch as be speaks of Mark in conjunction with Matthew,
there can be scarcely a doubt, as Olsbausen has remarked, that
the Corpw Evangeltcum^ or Collection of the Four Gospels,
(EuayyiUuf Eua^yskixov) was already in circulation among the
churches ; and if so, then undoubtedly the Greek translation of
Matthew had already been made, and was in use by the church-
es at large.

On this account, the declaration of Papias, viz., that " each
one interpreted them [the narrations] as he could," has been
thought to be very strange, and much severe comment has
been made upon the good father, on account of this inaccurate
and seemingly unmeaning expression. A little candour, how-
ever, would remove, as it seems to me, all serious difficulty.
We have only to imagme the limitations above stated, and there
is nothing in the declaration of Papias which would seem to de-
serve any special animadversion, believing, as be did, io the ex-
istence of a Hebrew origbal of Matthew.

But we have not yet done with this subject. The testimo-
ny of Papias, in this case, like all other testimony of the fathers,
is a fair subject of examination, while the cause b pending.
The witness may lawfully, and in this case must, be cross-ex-
amined.

At all adventures, so far as we know, Pa[4as speaks» in
regard to the matter before us, what he had learned only by
tradition, and not from any personal acquaintance with a jBe-
brew Gospel. It matters not whether he had this traditionaiKy
account from John the Presbyter, (as seems most probable), or
from any other source entitled to the like credit. There can be
no reasonable doubt, that such a view of this subject prevailed ex-
tensively in the ancient churches ; and, I doubt not, it must have
been prevalent in the time of Papias. But whence did it origi-
nate ? And what are the circumstances which will account lor
its origin, without necessitating us to suppose it to be matter of
£ict, that Matthew actually wrote his Goep^l in Hebrew ? This

1838.] Maiihew'i Qwpth 141

18 the cross-examination which should be made of Papias' test!-
mony^ before the cause comes to a final issue.

It is a matter well known among all who are acquainted with
the writings of the earlier fathers, that there existed in very
early times a Oospel nata Ma^^a7ov, or, as it was perhaps
more frequently named, a Gospel xa%^* *Jifigaiovg^ and some-
times icat' anooToXovg. This Gospel was current among the
Jewish converts, who began very early to be called by way of
distinction Ebionitesy and afterwards Nazarenesy and then
Nazarenes and Ebionites, because they were divided into two
different sects. Several of the fathers make no distinction,
however, sometimes comprising them all under the one name,
and sometimes under the other. Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Ori-
gen, call them Ebiomtes. The leading distinction of these
sects seems to have been, that the Ebionites held to the univer-
sal obligation of the Mosaic law, and also maintained the mere
humanity of Christ ; while the Nazarenes held the law to be
obligatory only upon Jews, and in other respects do not seem
to have been justly exposed to the charge of heresy, although
this was sometimes made against them.

Among both of those sects (bow early they were divided
we know not), there .was in circulation, the so-named Gospel
according to the Hebrews ; among the Ebionites, as Epipha-
oius testifies (Haeres. c. 3. 13. al.), with the two first chapters
excluded ; but among the Nazarenes, unimpaired, i. e. not cur-
tailed.

What sort of a Gospel this was, we shall have occasion to
inquire in the sequel. Here we confine ourselves to the simple
inquiry : Ai how early a period can we trace any testimonies
of its being in existence.

Eusebius (H. E. IV. 22) has given us an account of Hege-
sippus, an ecclesiastical historian of much credit, who flourisl^
in the time of Justin Mailyr, i. e. about 140 sea. From him.
Eusebius states that he had copiously extracted in his own work ;
and he then adds : " Some things he [Hegesippus] produces
from the Gospel according to the Hebrews^ even the Syriac,
and appropriately of the Hebrew dialect, thus showing that he
was himself a believer of Hebrew origin."*' The word Syriac
has been much commented upon in this place ; and many have

*"£« T8 Tov na^ *jEPQalovg svayytXlov, xal tov SvffiOMOV, nal ldU§g
h tfig 'Ejio^og dutOKtov^ xivi jl&Hrtf ifi^alyw ii *E§^alm kammf
KsmuruvHwat,

142 Original Language of [Jux.r

felt it to be very obscure, while others have deduced strange
conclusions from it. Jerome (adv. Peleg. III. 1) has afibrded
us a satisfactory solution of the difficulty ; where, speaking of
this same Gospel, he says : " Evangelium juxta Hebraeos,
quod Chaldaico Syroque sermone scriptum est," i. e. ^ it b writ-
ten in the Syro-Chalaaic ;' which was the Hebrew of that day.

There can be no doubt, then, that very early in the second
century the so-called Qospel according to the Hebrew* was ex-
tant, and also in the Hebrew language of the day.

After this period we meet with still more decided evideoce
of its existence. Clement of Alexandria, at the close of the
second century, cites a passage from it, i. e. from some Greek
translation of it^ (for Clement did not understand the Hebrew),
which be prefaces by the following expression : 'Ev r^ %ad^
'Efigalovg ivuyyMt^ yifguma^. That this was in some respects
a diflferent Gospel fh)m our present Greek Matthew, is evident
from the fact, that the passage which Clement here cites is not
found in our copies ; Clem. Opp. II. p. 453. ed. Potteri.

Eusebius, moreover, in bis Hist. Ecc. VI. 17, speaks of
Symmachmy the well known early Greek translator of the Scrip-
tures, who was contemporary with Clement of Alexandria, as
baving^ appealed to the Oospel according to the Hebrews, in
order to confirm his own heretical sentiments. But as the pas-
sage in which Eusebius thus speaks is obscure in some respects,
and has been a matter of controversy in regard to its real import,
I will not cite it at length in this place. ][ may, however, confi-
dently refer to it as one of the clear proofe of the supposed ex-
istence of the Gospel in question, in the time of Symmachus.

Origen (about 240^ speaks often of this same Gospel, and
makes several quotations from it. He thus introduces it in his
Tract. VIII. in Matthew, of which we have the Latin transla-
tion : " Scriptum est in evangelic quodam, quod dicitur secuap-
dum HebraeoSf etc." Again, (Comm. in Jer. Homil. XV. and
Comm. in Johann. II. p. 53, ed. de La Rue), he professedly
cites another passage from this Gospel. Both of the passages
which Origen cites, are wanting in our present Gospel ; as we
shall hereafter see.

Eusebius (H. E. III. 27), speaking of the Ebionites, says:
JSvayyeUtp di fiovf^ t^ xab' *£figalovg liyofiipm ^^oifcfvoiy T»y
Xomoip ofiixgov inowvvro Xoyov, i. e. ^ using the Gospel accord-
ing to the Hebrews, they make very little account of the others.'

Epiphanius, at the close of the fourth century, speaks oftea

1838.] Matthew's Gospel. 143

of the Gospel accordmg to the Hebrews. Id Haer. XXX. 3, he
sajs of the Ebionites, that ^^ they receive the Gospel Kara Mat"
Oalov^ and this only do they( as well as the Cerinthians) use.
They call it, moreover, xara *EPgulovg,^^ i. e. * the Gospel ac^
cording to the Hebrews.' In Haer. XXX. 13 he speaks still
more expressly : '^ In the Gospel named xara Mat^alop,
which is current among them [the Ebionites], not in its complete
and entire form, but adulterated and curtailed, and which they
call \E^gai%6v, it is said, etc."*

Jerome speaks many times of the Gospel secundum Hebraeos
or jtacta Hebraeos ; sometimes he called it the Gospel duode"
dm apostohrum, and then tbe Gospel jiucta Matthaeum. In
his book de Viris Illustribus (c. III.), he says that '^Matthew
wrote the Gospel of Christ in Hebrew letters and words. . . A
copy in the Hebrew is preserved at the present time in the li-
brary at Caesarea. ... I also obtained an exemplar from the
Nazarenes of Beroea in Syria, who gave me leave to copy it.'^
Of this copy Jerome made both a Greek and a Latin transla-
tion.

Tbe reader should be notified here, that while the words of
Jerome, in this passage, seem to confound the original Gospel
of Matthew with this Gospel of tbe Nazarenes, yet he else-
where makes a distinction so clear between tbem, besides giving
quotations from the latter which exhibit important discrepancies,
that there can be no doubt that he did not consider them in all
respects, or even in all important respects, as one work.

From very early times, then, i. e. from the time of Hegesip-
pus ^about 140) we have decisive testimony that a Gospel ao
cording to the Hebrews was in circulation. But nothing de-
cisive as to the similarity of this with our canonical Matthew, i^
produced by Eusebius, in his narrative respecting tbe quotation
from it by Hegesippus.

Besides Hegesippus, we have no testimony which will satisfy
us, that any of the Christian fathers, excepting Clement of
Alexandria and Origen, ever saw this Gospel, until we come
down to Epiphanius and Jerome, at the close of the fourth
century. As to Clement, who quotes from it, he had no
knowledge of Hebrew, and therefore, as we may reasonably

* *E¥ Ttff ttao avToi^ AayytUU^ nuta Mai^ahif iwofiaj^ofdpa^ ovx

144 Original Language of [Jvlt

conclude, he must have bad a Oreek traoskition of it. Bat
Origen, who has also repeatedly quoted it, bad some knowledge
of the Hebrew ; yet there is not the slightest appearance, in
any of bis quotations, that he cited from the Hebrew copy of
the Gospel %ai ^Efigalovg. There can be scarcely a doubt,
that a Greek translation of this was current in some degree at
Alexandria, in the time of Clement and Origen ; but it would
seem that this must have perished, however, before the time of
Jerome, inasmuch as he made a new Greek version of the
Hebrew copy.

Two or three questions more must be briefly discussed,
before our way is clear to put a right estimate upon the testi-
mony of the fathers respecting a Jikbreto original of Matthew.

(1) Was the Gospel according to the Hebrem, the same m
all important respects as our canoniceU MatthetOy so far as we
can gather from the fathers; or was it an interpolated and in
mam respects a spurious Matthew 1

The latter beyond all reasonable question, as the facts which
follow will shew. If we except some passages in Justin Mar*
tyr, which some critics suppose to have been taken from the
Gospel according to the Hebrews, we find no quotations of a
decisive character, until we come down to Clement of Alexan-
dria. Although Eichhorn, Credner, and several other writers,
earnestly contend that Justin must have quoted from the Gos-
pel according to the Hebrews, yet as Justin no where makes
mention of such a work, and as be appeals constantly to his
*Anofivfjfiopivfiata tmp '^oazokwv^ we cannot be safe in taking
it for granted that he used the Nazarene Gospel. That which
he seems to have quoted from it, may be naturally accounted
for, from his acquaintance with Jews and Jewish traditions,
which repeated many things found in the Gospel according to
the Hebrews.

Clement gives us difierent ground, on which we may with
more safety take our stand. ^' It is written,^' says he (Opp,
Strom. II. p. 453 ed. Potteri)^ "in the (jospel sa^* 'JEpguio^Pf*
*0 ^avfidaag fictaiXevaei, »al o fiaa^Xevcag mvanavatai/* Such
an expression is no where found in our canonical Matthew.

Origen (Tract. VIII. in Matt.), in the old Latin trandatioQ
of him which has been preserved, says : " In a certain Gospel,
which is called Secundum Hebraeosy it is written : Another
rich man said to him [Jesus], Master, what good thing shaU I
do that I may live ? He said to him : Obey the law and the

1838.] Maithew'9 Gotpel 145

prophets. He answered : I have done so. He said to him :
Go, sell all which thou hast, and give it to the poor ; then come
and follow me. But the rich man began to scratch his head
(coepit scalpere caput suum), and it did not please him ; and
tne Lord said to him : How canst thou say, I liave obeyed the
law and the prophets, since it is written in the law, Thou sbalt
love thy neighbour as thyself? Behold ! many of my brethren,
the sons of Abraham, are clothed with 61th, and dying by rea«
son of hunger; yet thy house is full of many good things, and
still nothing at all goes from it to them. Then turning to
Simon his disciple, sitting near him, he said : Simon, son of
Joanne, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a
needle, than for a rich man [to enter] into the kingdom of
heaven."

What a tasteless compiler he must have been, who furnished
out such a paragraph as this for the Jewish converts of early
times, is evident enough from the bare perusul of it. But this
is not all. Take another quotation by Origen from this Gospel
of the Nazarenes, in his Comm. in Jer. Homil. XV. Opp. Vol.
UI. According to Origen, the following words are put, by
this Gospel, into the mouth of the Saviour: igt&iXafii fti ij

nifit iig to Sgos to fti'ya, Safimg, i. e. ^ then my mother, the
Holy Spirit, took me by one of the hairs of my head, and car*
ried me to the great mountain. Tabor.'

Beyond this we can gather no definite materials from .Cle-
ment and Origen, which will help us to determine the condition
of the Gospel according to the Hebrews.

Eusebius (III. 39) says : ^' Papias in his *ISf^iiai$g has told
a story of a woman accused to the Saviour of many sins/'
He then adds : ijv ro na& ' *^gmovg ivayyiX$ov natix*^, i. e*
which [story] the Gospel according to the Hebrews contains.
What this story was, we are not informed ; but it seems proba-
ble enough, that it was the account of the woman taken in
adultery (John 8: 2 — 11), which had been added to the Naz-
arene or Ebionite Gospel of Matthew, by some interpolating
band. At any rate, it plainly consisted of matter foreign to
our present canonical Gospel.

We have already seen, that Epiphanius expressly testifies
concerning the Ebionites, that they used an adulterated and
curtailed Gospel of Matthew, although the Nazarenes made uae
of one which was nktigAtutop. In another place he has di»-

Vol. XII. No. 31. 19

146 Original Language of [Jolt

closed more fully hb meaning, by telKng -us that the two fiist
chapters of Matthew were wanting in the copies of the Ebion-
ites, and that nheir Gospel began with the third chapter of
Matthew in this manner : 'jF/mro iv ralg tjfAigaig *Hgtiiov
70V fiaaUitog ttjg *Jovdalag, ^X^ep */(aavvrig fianxlCoiv x. r. A.
Haeres. XXX. 13.

In the same place Epiphanius makes several long quotations
from the Gospel in question, which are adapted to give us a
fuller insight into the true condition of this work. I shall mere-
ly exhibit a translation of some of these ; referring the reader,
who wishes to verify this, to the original in Epiphanius, or to
Olshausen who has exhibited the originals in his work on the
Genuineness of the Gospels, pp. 52 seq.

The passages now to be cited must have stood very near
the commencement of the Ebionite Gospel.

'^ There was a certain man named Jesus, and he was about
thirty years of age, who chose us ; and coming to Capernaum,
he entered into the house of Simon who is called Peter, aod
opening his mouth he said : Passing along the Lake of Tiberius,
I chose John and James, sons of Zebedee, and Simon and An-
drew, and Thaddeus and Simon Zelotes, and Judas Iscariot ;
and thee Matthew^ sitting at the receipt of custom, I called,
and thou didst follow me. I will, therefore, that there should
be twelve apostles for a testimony to Israel. And John was
baptizing, and there went out to him, etc.'' The sequel is
neady in the words of Matthew 3: 4 — ^7, with some few changes
in the order of words, and some in the diction.

In the same chapter of Epiphanius is contained another par-
agraph of the Gospel before us, which has respect to the bap-
tism of John, and which should be presented to the reader as
another specimen of the Hebrew Gospel.

" Now when the people were baptized, Jesus came and was
baptized by John ; and when he came up from the water, the
heavens were opened, and he saw the Holy Spirit of God in
the shape of a dove descending and coming upon him ; and
there was a voice from heaven saying : Thou art my beloved
Son, in whom I am well pleased. And again : This day have
I begotten thee. And straightway a great light shone about
the place. John, beholding this, said : Who art thou Lord ?
And again there was a voice from heaven to him : This is my
beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. Then John, failing
•down before him, said : I beseech thee. Lord, baptize thou me.

1838.]

MHithev/s Oofpel.

147

But he forbade him, saying : Suflfor it, for it is meet that all
things should thus be fulfilled."

In Haeres. XXX. 14 Epiphanius cites another passage irom
the Ebionite Gospel, which, as I apprehend, gives us a very
&ir specimen of the general tenor of this Gospel, and its near
relation to the genuine one of Matthew. That the reader may
make the comparison of the two with facility, I here present
them both in the Greek, that of the Nazarene Gospel being a
copy of the Greek version (if it be a version) which Epiphanius
has given us.

V

on

Gospd according to the Hebrews.

Sdjf^, h %& ivayysliivm avrop,
t Idov ! ^ fifjffjQ GOV not ol iHik-
q>oi oov s^o) loTijxaacy, tins' "Ott
jLg fiov ifnlv ^riJtjg fiov xa» idtX-
q>ol ; Kttl ixKBivag inl tovg fia&e-
tag T^y /c^o^9 ^917* Ovrol iuriv ol
adiXipoi fiov not ^ fivti]^, oi noiovf"
ttg TO &$liifitna tov nargog fiOV.

Matt. XIL 47—50.

Emt di Ti^ airt^' *Idov, ^ ju^-
tilQ oov fial ol ad(Xq>ol aov t^ta
icT^xaot, fyfiovvTig aoi XaXfjoai'
'O di inoxgid^Btg elne t^ Botorti
airt^' Tig iativ r\ ftiin}^ fiov / xo^
theg eUitv ol adtXq^oi fiov; Kal
indyagxijv x^'Ul^ airsov inl lovg
fia^fftag ainov An»' 'Jdov, ^
fi^Tif^ jttov> ami el adsX<pol (lov,
^Oaxig yao Sv notiiop %b '^iXriixa
Tov natgog uov jov iy oigarolg,
avtog fiov iotlqtog ual idsX<pri xal
IKrfVUq iaxlp.

The reader will see, that in the present case, the Gospel ac-
cording to the Hebrews is a mere abridgment of our canonical
Matthew.

In Haeres. XXX. 16, Epiphanius expressly cites the Gospel
among the Ebionites as containing the following passage : " I
came to abolish the sacrifices ; and if ye will not cease from
ofiering sacrifices, wrath will not cease from you."

In XXX. 22 Epiphanius complains of the Ebionites for
having altered the sense of a passage in Matthew 26: 17^
Where unk thou that we make ready to eat the passover 1
inasmuch as their Gospel makes him say : ^' I have not much
desired to eat this passover-flesh with you." Here is a passage
transferred, as it would seem, from Luke 22: 15, with the nega-
tive fif) added to it, so as to reverse the true sense of the ex-
pression.

These are the principal passages which Epiphanius has given
us from the Gospel accordmg to the Hebrews. Jerome, who
obtained a copy of this Gospel from the Nazarenes at Beroea
in Syria, and who translated it into Greek and Latin, has pre-

148 Original Language of [Jult

served here and there in his works, oKnre fragments of the
nature. 1 shall present a few of them ; in order that the read-
er may be enabled more fully to understand the tenor and con-
dition of this Gospel.

In commenting on Isaiah 11: 1, '^ There shall come forth a
rod out of the stem of Jesse, etc«," after giving his views of the
phrase. The Spirit of the Lord »haU rest upon him, he sap :
*^ Sed, juxta Evangelium auod Hebraeo sermone conscriptum
legunt Nazaraei: Descenaet super eum omnis fons Spirilus
Sancti."

Xgain ; " Porro in Evangelio cujus supra fecimus mentionem,
baec scripta reperimus : Factum est, autem, ^uum accendisset
Dominus de aqua, descendit fons omnis Spiritus Sancti et re-
quievit super eum, et dixit illi : Fili mi, in omnibus propbetis
expectabam te, ut venires et requiescerem in te. Tu es enim
requies mea, tu es filius mens primogenitus, qui regnas in sem-
pitemum."

In Cont. Pelag. IIL % Jerome says : " In Evangelio jux*
ta Uebraeos . . . narrat historia : Ecce, mater Domini et fratres
ejus dicebant ei : Joannes Baptista ha ptizat in remissionem pee-
catorum ; eamus ut baptizemur ah eo. Dicit autem eis : Quid
peccavi, ut vadam et baptizer ab eo ? Nisi forte hoc ipsum,
quod dixi, ignorantia est.''

Again ; 'V^t in eodem volumine : Si peccaverit frater tuus
in verbo . . • [citing nearly the words of Matt. 18: 21, 22, then
adding] : Etenim in prophetis quoque, postquam uncti sunt
Spiritu sancto, inventus est sermo peccati."

Again, in Comm. in Mich. 7: 6 : ^^ Qui legerit Canticum
Canticonim .... credideritque in Evangelio quod secundum
Hebraeos editum^ nuper transtulimus [i. e. I have lately trans-
lated], in quo, ex persona Salvatoris, dicitur : Modo tulit me
mater mea, Sanctus Spiritus, in uno capillorum meorum."

In his Comm. on Afatt. 12: 13 he says : In Evangelio quo
utuntur Nazaraeni et Ebionttae, quod nuper in Giaecum de
Hebraeo sermone transtulimus, etquod vocaturaplerisque Mat-
thaei authenticum, homo iste, qui aridam manum habet, coenien-
tarius scribitur, istiusmodi auxilium precans : Coementarius
eram, manibus victum queritans ; precor te, Jesu, ut mihi resti-
tuas sanitatem, ne turpiter mendieem cibos."

Comm. in Matt. 23: 25 : *^ In Evangelio quo utuntur Naz-
araeni, pro JUio Barachiae repenmus scriptum filiwn Jofadae.

De Viris lUust. II., Jerome says : Evangelium quoque, quod

1838.] Matikeu^i Ga^peL 149

appellatur secundum Hebraeos, et a me super id Graecum Lat-
inumque sermonem translatum est • • • • refert : Dominus au-
tem quum dedisset siodonem servo sacerdotis, ivit ad Jacobum
et apparuit ei. Juraverat eoim Jacobus, se non comesturum
panem ab ilia bora, qua biberat calicero Domini, donee videret
eum resurgentem a dormientibus."

Once more ; Comm. in Matt. 27: 16 Jerome says : *' Iste
[Barrabbas] in Evangelio quod scribitur juxta Hebraeos, Jilius
magistri eomm tnterpretatur, qui propter seditionem et bomici-
dium fiierat condemnatus."

There are a few other passages in Jerome of a similar tenor ;
but they are brief, and need no) be here cited. Enough has
been already produced to shew fully what was the real internal
state and condition of the Gospel according to the Hebrews.

That this Gospel was an interpolated one, and in some re-
spects therefore spurious, is self-evident from the mere perusal
of the above quotations from it ; at least this is perfectly plain,
if we allow our present canonical Matthew to be genuine.

But there is another view of this subject which must be ta-
ken, and which, although we might connect it with the prece-
ding mvestigation, we will consider under a separate head, in
order to render the understanding of the matter before us more
easv.

(2) Did the Oospel according to the Hebrewsy nottDithetund'
ing stteh interpolatume and changes as those above exhibited^
so nearly rtsmUe our canonical Matthew , that it might be call-
ed j and in common parlance was in fact often CMledj JBvst/-
yiiiop nasu Mas^aTop ?

The earlier writers, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and
Eusebius> when they refer to the Goepel in question, charactep*
ize it by the name, Gospel according to the Hebrews ; which
seems to have been perhaps the more current and usual appella-
tion. But later writers, who had a personal acquaintance with
it in its Hebrew form, give us also another name, calling it
aomethnes the Gospel tcutd Mat^uiov. So Epiphanius says
of the Ebionites (Haer. XXX. 3): Aixoptai x6 nata Mut^alop
svaffiKtop,. . [and then adds], naXovoi dt avto xaid 'JSflgsUovg.
Again, in Haer. XXX. 13, he says of the same : '£v rcji na^'
avtoTg sva^eXiff xata Muf&a7ov 6vofiaCofiip4^. In Haeres.
XXIX. 9 he says, with particular reference to the Nazarenes :
*^ They have the Gospel according to Matthew in full, and in
the Hebrew language ; for among them is doubtless preserved

150 Original Languagt of [Jult

this [Gospel] as it was written at first in Hebrew letters. Bat
I know not whether they have removed the genealogy fiom
Abraham to Christ.''

The reader will please to note this last expression ; because
it shows very plainly, that although Epiphanius had in his
hands, as it would seem from some passages in his works, a
copy (probably a Greek one, as we shall see hereafter), of the
Ebionite Gospel, yet it appears that he had not one of the
Nazarenes, inasmuch as he expressly declares, that he does not
"know whether they insert ot omit the genealogy. In this state
of the matter one cannot but wonder how becomes so explicitly
to declare, that the Gospel of the Nas^renes is full and complete,
nkfigiotaxov. But consistency, alas ! is not what we are always
to expect in Epiphanius. It is sufficient, however, to account
in the present case for his expressing himself in this manner,
to suppose, that such was the current report among the Naaca-
renes themselves, and that he drew from this source.

In Haeres. XXX. 14 Epiphanius says expressly, that Ce-
rinthus and Carpocrates used the same Gospel as the Ebionites,
1. e. the Oospel according to the Hebrews, Yet in the same
place he gives this Gospel another name. He says that the
above named heretics proved the natural descent of Jesus from
Joseph," by the genealogy in the beginning>o« xax« Arax^a?oy
^ayy^lovJ^ Comparing the passage from Epiphanius cited
above on p. 143, where he describes the Ebionite Gospel as
curtailed^ viz. deprived of the two first chapters of Matthew,
with what the same author says here, there would seem to be
some contradiction ; for here he says, first that Cerinthus and
Carpocrates used the same Gospel as the Ebionites, and
secondly that these two heretics undertook to prove the merely
human origin of Jesus from the genealogy. How then could
they have used the same Gospel as the Ebionites, since theirs
excluded the genealogy ?

Still the reputation of this father for consistency is not so
desperate even here, as it seems at first sight to be. \^at he
means for substance to say is, that both the Ebionites, and
Cerinthus with Carpocrates, made use of the Gospel according
to the Hebrews, or a Hebrew copy of the Gospel called
Evayyiklop Kara Mat^aiov. This might be true as to substance,
although there might be a discrepancy as to some particular
passages. That Epiphanius has expressed himself unguardedly
and inaccurately, there can be no dovbt ; that be has, however,

1838.] Matthew's Gospel I5t

I been guilty of any glaring contradiction, when candidly in-

f terpreted, it would not be so easy to make out.

The reader will note, that one thing at least is proved by the
I examples cited above of the expressions made use of by Epi-

[. phanius, viz., that both the Gospel of the Ebionites and of the

jVazarenes was designated more or less frequently, at least
among the Christians of the church catholic, by the name icaxa
Mar^ulop; and that while their copies of Matthew's Gospel
doubtless differed in some respects, they were generally of
much the same tenor, the basis being in all probability the same.
The questions, whether Epiphanius had ever seen the flc-
brew copy of the Gospel under consideration — ^and whether, in
case he had, he could read it in the Hebrew — are not capable of
being solved with much certainty. Eusebius was a native of
J Palestine, born probably at Eleutheropolis, a city within the

^ limits of the tribe of Judah, at no great distance in a south-

west course from Bethlehem. He was a monk in the cloister
there, sometime about A. D. 360—370. He was then re-
moved to Salamis in Cyprus, of which be was constituted
\ bishop, and where he wrote his works. The Ebionites had

their chief seats of residence, as he tells us in Haeres. XXX.
[, 18, in Nabatea, Paneas, Moab, Kochabon, Adraon — all places

^ in and around Palestine — ^and the island of Cyprus. Now

whether we contemplate this father, before he obtained his
' bishopric, or afterwards, we find him in the neighbourhood of

' the Ebionites ; which suggests a good reason for the unusually

^ copious and particular accounts that he has given of them.

' That he must have understood something of the Hebrew lan-

' ga^ge, one can hardly doubt who considers the place of his

' origin, and the society in which he lived. That he possessed

' knowledge enough of it to read it with facility, or to seek with

' eagerness and solicitude after books written in it — has not, I

believe, ever yet been rendered probable.

When Olshausen assumes, therefore, as he appears to do
(Echtheit etc. p. 55), that Epiphanius had a Hebrew copy of
the Ebionite Gospel in his own hands, he assumes what it
would be difficult to prove ; and what Credner, in his work on
the Gospel of the Jewish Christians (p. 336 seq.), has well
nigh shewn to be altogether improbable. The most which we
can fairly allow seems to be, that Epiphanius speaks from in-
formation communicated to him by the Ebionites, in respect to
the state of their Gospel ; or else, that he had a Chreek trans-

163 Ordinal Language of [Jin.T

lation of it which he consulted. The diffirent ways in whidi
he cites the same passages, and the manner in which some oi
the paragraphs cited commence, seem to prove, as Credner has
shewn, that be appeals to other writings besides the Gospel, or
at any rate to other sources than autopsy for his information and
citations.

It should be added, in order to strengthen these remarks,
that (as we have seen above p. 149) Epiphanius speaks in like
manner, i. e. familiarly and confidently in many respects, of
the Oospel of the Nazarenes^ which, nevertheless, it is certain
even by his own confession, he had not seen.

Jerome came upon the stage while Epiphanius was living
and still active. Of all the fathers Jerome had incomparably
the best knowledge of the Hebrew. He also obtained^ a copy
of the Gospel according to the Hebrews, firom Jews at Beroea,
and translated, it both into Greek and Latin ; as he expressly
says in a passage above quoted from him (p. 148). His testi*
mony, therefore, will be of more weight than all other testimo-
ny, in respect to the specialities of the subject before us.

First of all then he says, that the Nazarenes and Ebionites
use the same Gospel (0pp. IV. p. 47) : '^ Evangelium quo
utuntur Nazaraei et Ebionitae." He doubtless means to say
this in a like sense with Epiphanius, viz., that they both have
a Gospel whose basis is JJdatthew. So we shall see, m the
sequel.

In his work Contra Pelag. III. 3 he says : ^' In Evangelio
juxta Hebraeos . . . quo utuntur usque hodie Nazaraeni • • .
sive, tUplerimie atUunumtfjuxta MatthfuumJ*

Again, in his Comm. on Matt. 12: 13 he says: ** In Evan-
gelio quo utuntur Nazaraeni et Ebionitae . . • quod vocatur u
plerisque Maiihaei auihenticum.

In other passages he appeals to this same work, sometimes
with the title of Evangelium iuxta Hebraeos, then again with
the designation of " secundum Hebraeos— quod Hebraeo Serroo*
ne conscriptum est— -quo utuntur Nazaraeni et Ebionitae — ^He-
braicum — quod Hebraicb Uteris scriptum est — quod a me
translatum est, etc."

Here then, in the two accounts of Epiphanius and Jerome,
who are the only fathers that appear to have had any minute
and particular information respecting the parties of Jewish
Christians, we have evidence perfectly satisfactory of the usual
appellation given to their Gospel " ut plerique autumant,

1838.] MaUhew's Oo$pel tS3

juxta itfa^Aoetim-— ^uod vocatur a plerisqae Matikaei au-^

Credner aflfects to doubt whether the Ebionites themselves
ever ^ve to this Gospel that name. He thinks they only called
it xa^* 'Efigaiovg. But this opinion seems to roe groundless.
The name which they more habitually gave to their own Gos*
pel, would be the name usually given to it by others. They
would very naturally, one might almost say necessarily, appeal
to apostolic authority id support of the Scriptures oh which,
and on which only, they relied ; for they did not receive, at
least the Ebionites did not, the other Gospels. What they
gave out their Gospel to be, the public, who could not examine
it, supposed it to be, and named it accordingly. Hence Jerome
and Epiphanius assert in terms most clear and plain, that the
appellation, or at least one appellation, of their Gospel was
scorer Mat^atov,

Epiphanius again and again asserts, that this Gospel was the
Hebrew Oospel of Matthew, In Haeres. XXX. 3 he says
of the Ebionites : dtx^vrai to jcara Mat^aiov ivayyiXtOP, rovrq»
. . ,j[goivta^ fAOPtf,^ KaXovaip Si avto xaxa ^Efigaiovg^ togra aX*
fl^'j iar^p iituipj on Mai^alog pkOPOQ 'Epgahti nal 'JEfiaiKoTg
^gaftfiaaip ip t^^ natvtj dia^i^nfj inoniaaro ifjp rov ivayyikiov
MOtaiv t€ nat ntjgvyfiii, i. e. iliey receive the Gospel accord-
ing to Matthew; this . . . only do they use. They call it,
moreover, xaio 'Effgalovg; inasmuch as one may truly say,
that Matthew only made the publication and proclamation of
his Gospel in the New Testament, in Hebrew and in Hebrew
characters."

In a passage before cited on p. 145 above, Epiphanius says of
the Nazarenes : ^' They have the Oospel according to Matthew
in full and in Hebrew. Among them this is undoubtedly still
preserved, as it was at first written, in Hebrew letters."

Now if we add to this, Jerome's ui plerique autunumt, juxta
Matthaeumy and quod vocatur a plerisque Matthaei authenip-
cum^ no reasonable doubt can be left, that the ancient church-
es and individual Christians thought and spoke of the Gospel
according to the Hebrews as being for substance the same as
the Gospel of Matthew. It was given out to be such, by those
who used it. Even men like Epiphanius, who made it a sub-
ject of inquiry, usually spoke of it as such, when they did not
wish to go into particulars or to be minute ; and Jerome himself
with all bis minute and accurate and ceruin knowledge of it,

Vol. Xn. No. 31. 20

154 Original Language of [Jolt

not unfrequendy names it, and refers to it, tn the like manner
with others.

We are come at last near to the end of our digression ; if in-
deed that may be called digretsion^ which enters essentially in-
to the estimate of the testimony on which the whole questioD
before us depends. One brief inquiry more will bring us to
the position, from which we may look out and take a satisiac^
tory survey, at least so it seems to me, of the whole ground
that is to be occupied. This is,

(3) Did those ancient fathers who had any particular oc-
^uaintance with the Gospel according to the Hebrews, suspect
Us claims to canonical authority, or rather ^ reject them; and
this notwithsiandinff they often spoke in the popidar way re^
specting this Oospd as though it belonged to MattheWy or was
the same with his 1

With the exception of Hegesippus, of whose work only frag-
ments are preserved in Eusebius, there were none of the early
fathers who could read the Gospel according to the Hebrews
in the language in which it was current among the Nazarenes
and Ebi'onites, if we exempt Origen and Jerome. Epipbanius
might be claimed by some ; but we have already viewed the
ground on which this claim stands.

We have seen above (p. 141), that the testimony of Hege-
sippus, preserved by Eusebius, avails nothing as to the present
question ; inasmuch as Eusebius merely says, that ' Hegesippus
cites some things from the Gospel according to the Hebrews,
and thus shews that he was of Hebrew origin.' This does not
enable us to make any accurate estimate in regard to what
Hegesippus thought of the authority of thb Go^l.

Clement of Alexandria has quoted but one short sentence
(p. 144 above), and this without saying any thing which gives
us definite views what his opinion of the authenticity of thb
Gospel was. He must have quoted from a Oreek copy, (un-
less indeed he learned what be has quoted from some Jewish
Christians), for he had no knowledge of the Hebrew.

Origen, however, had some knowledge of this kind ; al-
though nothing in his quotations renders it certain that he bad
seen the Hebrew copy. But at all events, this critical father
had in some measure weighed the subject in his mind, respect-
ing the authenticity of this Gospel, and plainly doubted of it.
So it would seem to be, if we may trust his old and literal in-
terpreter into Latin, who has preserved for us a declaration of

1838.] MMhev^s Gatpel 155

Origen, ia his Tract. VIII. ad Matt. 19: 19. Origen's words
are : *< Scriptura est in evangelio quodam, quod dicitur secun-
dum Hebraeos^ n tamen placet aticui stucipere ittud non ad
autoritatemy sed ad manifestaiumem proposiiae questicnis.**
Then follows the quotation from tbb Gospel presented on p.
144 above.

Let the reader mark here, first the phrase evangelio quodam.
The implication of course is, that what is to be quoted stands
not in THE Oospelj but in a certain writing which some claim
as a Gospel. What follows clearly evinces this to be the
sense ; viz., if indeed it is agreeable to any one to admit this
(or receive this)^ not in the way of authority (or as author^
tative)y hut for the sake of illustrating the question proposed.
Origen takes it for granted that the authority of the Evangelv'
urn quoddam will be excepted to. He tacitly acknowledges
the propriety of such an exception. He does not ask, there-
fore, that it should be received as auttMritativCj but only that
it may be admitted by way of illustration or explanation.

That such were the views of this critical father, there can be
no doubt ; for in all bis reasonings, homilies, and commenta-
ries, he never appeals to this Gospel in the way of citing an
authority. It b plain, therefore, that he did not regard it as
such.

Epiphanius, as we have seen above (p. 143), although he
calb the Ebionite Gospel the Oospel uata Max^alov^ and avers
that the original Matthew in Hebrew letters is preserved among
the Nazarenes, yet explicitly states, at the same time, that the
Gospel used by the Ebionites was not nXrtgfoiaiov, but vipo-
^evfiipov xal i^ngaTijg&aafiivop, i. e. 'not complete, integer^
but adulterated and curtailed.' Again, in Haeres. XXX. 22
he accuses the Ebionites of having altered Matt. 26: 17, and
inserted li^ in&&vftltf in^d'Vfujaa tcgtag tovio to naaxa ^ayetp
fii&' vfAoiv, And lastly, neai*ly all the quotations he makes
fipom the Gospel in question go to shew, and probably were
designed to shew, what discrepancy there is between this and
the canonical Gospel of Matthew. With all the appellations
which he bestows on the Gospel according to the Hebrews,
and all his declarations about its being the original of Matthew's
Gospel, etc., it is manifest that he disregards its authority^ and
never thinks of appealing to it for the purpose of establishing
any Christian doctrine.

One may say, as some have sud, that he is inconsistent with.

n

166 OrigifUd Lafnguagt of [July

himself; and in some respects this cannot be denied. But, as
I have before remarked, the inconsistency is rather apparent
than real. In the one case, Epiphanius discloses the conunoii
views of the Christian Jews respecting their Gospel — ^views
that seem to have been adopted without examination by other
Christians, and tacitly acknowledged ; in the other, he gives us
a view of the state of the Jewish (jospel as it really was, and
he fully and practically shews his own opinion of it, by not ap-
pealing to it m the way of authority.

Jerome has expressed, for substance, the very same opinion
of the Gospel according to the Hebrews as Origen had done
before him. He not only mtimates, as he plainly does in the
passages quoted above, viz., a pUris^jUt ^ocatwr Matthaei <m-
theniicuM, and utplerique autumant juxta Matthaeumy th^i aU
were not agreed as to the Gospel of the Hebrews being an au-
thentic work of Matthew, but in another place he says express-
ly in regard to it : ^^Si non uteris ad autorUatemy saltern, utere
ad antiquitatem, quid omnes viri ecclesiastici senserint ;" Ad-
vers. Peiag. III. 1. Exactly as Origen, he here expresses him-
self in regard to the authority of the Nazarene Gospel ; he does
not presume to rely on it as autharityy for he does not expect
this will {be conceded to him ; but he may refer to that book
as a testimony of what the ancients in the church thought re-
specting the matter in question.

We are now at the end of our disquisition. Let us stop ba
a moment, and recapitulate the substance of what seems to be
sufficiently established.

I. There was current among Jewish Christians, during the
second, third, and fourth centuries, a Gospel often, and (as it
would seem) usually, named the Gospel xai« J/ar^a?o», bat
also very often named xa^' *Ji^figaiovg, and sometimes ike Gos-
pel of the twelve Apostles, This was given out by the Jewish
readers of it as the work of Matthew, and was thought and said
by them, and consequently by others, to have been composed
by him in the Hebrew language of that period.

II. Of all the ancient fathers whose testimony we have re-
specting it, Origen and Jerome were the only ones who were
capable of minutely examining its state, and condition, and
proper claims. I do not bring Hegesippus into this number,
because, although he was probably a Jew and could read the
original, we have not any testimony from him which will aid us
in determining the real state and claims of this Gospel. Ctem-

18S8.] Matthew* i Go9ptl 157

ent of Alexandria, and probably Epiphanius, could examine
only by tlie testimony of others, or through the medium of
some Greek translation of it to whicb they had access.

III. There must have been a great resemblance in most parts
of this Grospel to our canonical Matthew ; otherwise Jerome,
Epiphanius, Origen, and others, cannot well be supposed to
have expressed themselves concerning it as they have done,
calling it the Oospel according to Matthew ; although we may
well suppose the leading reason for their so doing, was the fact
that the Jewish readers of it gave it, oftentimes or perhaps more
commonly, that name. That the latter gave it out as the work
of an apostle, must follow almost of necessity from the credit
which they held to be due to it.

IV. The quotations from it which the ancient fathers have
transmitted to us, and the estimate which they expressly as well
as tacitly and impliedly make of it, shew clearly that they did
not, after all, regard it as authoritative, or entitled to the re-
ception of the catholic church. Had it been true that they
considered it as atUhentic, most certainly it would have been
appealed to as such ; and Jerome would have insisted that his
translation of it, like his version of the Old Testament Scrip*
tures, should be received instead of the common Greek Gospel
of Matthew then in circulation. But this he never did; and
this did no one of the ancient fathers.

It b now proper to remark, that we have in this view suffi-
cient iacts before us to account for all the seemingly contradic-
tory statements of Epiphanius and Jerome respecting the Gos-
pel according to the Hebrews, and to shew in what manner
these are to be reconciled with each other. When these fathers
tell us, that the Nazarenes were in possession of the original
Hebrew Gospel of Matthew, and that it was named the Oospel
scoTtt Matdalov, they tell us what were the current estimation
and name of it among the Jewish Christians of their times.
They show what it was given out for by the readers of it in
Hebrew, among whom it was in circulation. But when they
come to give us a nearer insight into the actual state and condi-
tion of this Gospel, they let us see at once that it was an adul-
terated and interpolated Gospel, and they never once intimate
that it should be substituted at all for the canonical Matthew,
but the contrary.

We have now attained, then, as it seems to me, a stand-point
from which we may look abroad upon the whole subject, as it

n

158 Origimd Language of [Jult

lies spread out before us in the works of the ancient fatheis.
We may now make a rational and consistent estimate of all the
evidence so often appealed to, in favour of a Hebrew Gospel of
Matthew.

A few of the declarations of this kind^ such as are the
strongest and most prominent, I* will now cite ; and then sub-
join some remarks upon the whole.

The testimony oi Papias, which perhaps was that of John
the Presbyter, has been already cited above (p. 139), and given
rise to the discussion through which we have passed. We
come then to other writers in succession. I give only the
translation here, because the originak (to which reference b
made) may at any time be consulted by the inquisitive reader,
and nothing particular is now dependent on a very esuict con-
struction, inasmuch as 1 fully concede that the ancients have
spoken in the manner alleged by Mr. Norton, although I do
not draw the same conclusion from their words which he does*

Irenaeus (Haeres. III. 1), as represented in Euseb. Hist.
Ecc. V. 8, speaks in the following manner of the Gospel of
Matthew : <^ Matthew published (^itpiyx^p) a Gospel among
the Hebrews, written in their own language."

Origen, as set forth in Euseb. Ecc. Hist. VI. 25, says:
" The first [Gospel] was written by Matthew . . . composed in
Hebrew letters, and given out to converts from Judaism."

Eusebius himself, in conformity with these traditionary ac-
counts, says in Hist. Ecc. III. 24 : '< Matthew at first preached
the Gospel to the Hebrews ; and when he was desirous to go
and preach to others, delivering his Gospel to them, written in
their vernacular language, he supplied the place of his own
personal presence among those whom he left, by this writing."

Epiphanius has already been quoted above ; but I will here
produce one seemingly very explicit passage from his Haeres.
XXIX* 9. He is speaking of the Jewish Christians, and says :
'' They [the Nazarenes] use the Gospel according to Matthew
in full and in Hebrew; for among them this is undoubtedly
(aaquSg) preserved, as it was written at first, in the Hebrew
language." And the like to this he says in some other places.

Jerome, soon after this (in his Lib. de Vir. IHust., Art. Mat-
thaeus) says : '^ [Matthew] first composed a Gospel of Christ
in Hebrew words and letters, on account of those of the cir-
cumcision in Judea who became believers, ^wd quis pottea
in Graecum iranstulerit^ non satis cerium est.

I

I

1838.] Mattheto's Gospel 159

Again, ID his Proleg. in Matt. (Vol. IV. p. 3) he says :
** Matthew first published his Gospel in Judea, in the Hebrew
language, particularly on account of those Jews who believed
in Jesus."'

In other places he speaks in the like way ; e. g. in Epist.
ad Damas. IV. p. 148---ad Hedibiam, IV. p. 173. Comm. in
Jes. III. p. 63^ Comm. in Oseam, III. p. 1311.

A few other passages might be gleaned ; but none are so
strong and plain as these. Eusebius relates (Ecc. Hist. V. 10)
a tradition respecting Pantaenus, viz., that ' he went iig *hdovg
[probably some part of Arabia Felix] and preached, and there
found the Gospel of Matthew, written in Hebrew letters, which,
according to report, the apostle Bartholomew bad delivered to
them.' But whether this was a translation on account of those
who could not speak Greek, or a copy of a Hebrew original
made on account of the Arabians who might understand the
Hebrew dialect, we have no means of determining. This
testimony seems hardly direct enough, therefore, to be brought
into the account.

Mr. Norton, and Olshausen, Campbell, Kuinoel, and many
others, assume the position, in view of all this testimony of the
fathers, that we must either concede the fact of an original
Hebrew Gospel of Matthew, or else abandon all deference to
ancient testimony.

I do not feel compelled to do either the one or the other.
Certainly I cannot relinquish the ground, that credit is due to
ancient testimony. But, on the other band, I cannot take the
ground that this testimony is to be received without examina-
tion— careful examination of all the circumstances which may
have shaped it so as it now appears to us. Let all the wit-
nesses be cross-examined ; not with the craft of a hired advo-
' Gate, who is paid well for the dexterity with which he sup-
presses, or confuses, or embarrasses an honest witness and
makes him speak contradictious, but with strenuous and hearty
effort to educe the truth.

Now there are circumstances attending this matter of an
original Hebrew Matthew, or at any rate attending the sup-
position that our canonical Matthew is only a iranshxtian, which
cannot be disposed of to my satisfaction, and, as I expect to
shew in the sequel, cannot well be disposed of by any critical
skill or acumen, so as to comport with the supposition that we
have in our canon only a translated Matthew. I must cast

n

160 Original Lcmguage of [Jitlt

myself here on the coDfidence of the reader, for a little while,
in order to finish my present discussion of these ancient testi-
monies ; and I beg him at least to admit it for the present as
possible, or rather as probable, that siuch circumstances as those
just named can be adduced.

On such ground, then, we find ourselves to be in the follow-
ing predicament. There are acts and circumstances which ap-
pear to render it improbable that our present Gospel is a
translation ; they are seemingly irreconcilable with this supposi-
tion. Yet the ancient fathers have agreed, that in earlier and
later times a report was spread throughout the churches and
generally believed, that the Gospel of Matthew was originally
written in Hebrew. What shall be said — what can be done —
in such a predicament as this ?

My answer is at band. The first thing to be done is, to see
whether there are not some circumstances which will explain
all the fathers have said, and explain it in such a way as nn-
peaches neither their integrity nor their understandings, and at
the same time will allow all the weight of the arguments which
go to disprove the correctness of their opinion as to an original
Hebrew Gospel. Such circumstances, as it appears to me, are
plainly found in the history of the Gospel according to the
Hebrews. From about A. D. 100 to A. D. 400 we can dis-
tinctly trace the existence of such a Gospel ; and we have
assurances of its general resemblance to the canonical Matthew,
in the name xara Matitcuov which was commonly given to it.
It was a Gospel which was written in the Hebrew language of
the day. It could not therefore be understood, and consequently
was not read, by the great body of Christians belonging to the
church catholic. Of all the fathers even of the earlv ages,
only Origen and Jerome could read and examine it. it circu-
lated among Christians who had separated themselves from the
catholic church, on the ground of Jewish rites and ceremonies;
and so far as it respects the Ebionites, on the ground also of
fimdamental disagreement with the church catholic in respect to
the rank and dignity of the Redeemer's person. There was
constantly more and more alienation springing up between the
church catholic and these Jewish Christians, so that the latter
kept themselves entirely aloof, and were not treated by the
Gentile Christians as a part of their brotherhood, and were not
disposed to seek for or accept such treatment. It was thus
matters went on through the second, third, and fourth centuries.

1838.] Mattkiui'i Goipel. 161

SooD after these bad elapsed we hear no more of the Jewish
Christians, and must naturally suppose that they dwindled
away until they became extinct.

In the mean time it is altogether clear^ that from a very early
period, (there can be no good reason to doubt, that even before
the expiration of the first century), they had a rallying-point for
their sectarian views in the so-called Oospel xora Max^aiov or
Gospel xad'* '£figalovQ. They could not have kept themselves
in countenance, nor even in existence, as a Christian sect, without
some such central point around which they must revolve.
That they regarded their Gospel as of apostolic origin, there
can be no reasonable doubt, because they would otherwise not
have rejected all other Gospels. That it originally had its
basis in the Gospel of Matthew, one is strongly tempted to be-
lieve, from the manner in which Origen, Epiphanius, and Je-
rome speak of it. But whether it was translated from Mat-
thew's canonical Greek Gospel, or vice versa^ that is a point on
which we have no explicit information ; I mean none which,
under circumstances like these, can be justly considered as
decisive. We shall see in the sequel, whether I have assumed
too much in this remark.

The great body of the Jewish Christians being thus earl^
separated from the church catholic, by their language and by their
opinions, and great aversion existing between the two parties,
the church at large gave themselves little or no concern about
them or their Scriptures. They indeed gave out that they had
a Gpspel xatti Mav^aJov. It was natural enough to suppose
that Matthew might have left such an one for his kinsmen after
the flesh. It was reported among the churches, and common-
ly believed, that he did ; and the fathers have given us that re-
port as it came to them. They have given it honestly, and
their integrity is not at all impeachable.

But mark now the result in respect to all those fathers who
made any particular examination into this matter. Origen gives
us a long passage irom the Jewish Gospel which is wholly spu-
rious. He gives us another which is preposterous ; (p. 144 seq.
above). He plainly discloses his views of the Jewish Gospel ;
and these are, that he does not deem it all authoritative. Epi-
phanius has given us many citations from the same Gospel,
and expressly told us, that the Ebionites used a Matthew which
was ovx nXijgtatatov, but was vtyoi^^vfikpov %al i^xgmttig&aafA^
vQv. He has given us many extracts also from the Gospel of

Vol. Xn. No. 31. 21

163 OrigisuU Language of [Jolt

the Nazarenes, which shew most fully that it was an adulten-
ted Gospel and had been the subject of many interpolations, is
case our canonical Matthew was the original basis of it* Je-
rome, who had a most intimate knowledge of this same Gospel
of the Nazarenes, and translated it both into Greek and Latm,
gives us a multitude of passages -from it of the same tenor with
those of Origen and Epiphanius ; and these fully demonstrate
what he has himself explicitly avowed, viz.> that CHie could
not appeal to this Gospel as a matter of authority.

All the testimony, then, being taken and compared together
in respect to this Jewish Gospel, nothing can be plainer and
more certain, than that, whatever resemblances it might have
to our canonical Matthew, yet it was plainly a very difierent
book from this, and had no substantial claims on the church
for reception as authoritative. On any other ground than that
which I have now taken, it is utterly incomprehensible how
our canonical Matthew should have maintained its place as it did
in the church. We cannot assume it as probable, that preju-
dice against the Jewish Christians hindered the church catholic
from receiving their Gospel. The same prejudice would have
operated in like manner in other cases, i et it did not. Id
the controversy bet ween, the unconverted Jews and the Chris-
tians with respect to the meaning of the Old Testament predict
tions concerning the Messiah, the Jews accused the Septuagint
of being a false translation ; while many Christian writers ac-
cused the Jews of having falsified their Hebrew Scriptures.
Yet all this did not hinder Origen from correcting the text of
the Septuagint so as to accord better with the Hebrew Scrip-
tures ; nor did it influence Jerome at all as to translating anew
the whole, so as to free the Christian churches from deference
to the defects of their Greek Scriptures. Origen and Jerome
were indeed obliged to contest some points with many of their
contemporaries ; but they did so boldly, and won the victory.

With such facts in view, I now make the appeal to every
candid critic, and ask : How can we possibly account for it, in
case Origen and Jerome regarded the Nazarene Matthew as
the real and authoritative one, that they did not at once lay
aside the canonical Matthew, and appeal to the other ? Jerome
furnished the churches with a Greek and Latin translation of
the other ; but not a word does he say in favour of receiving it
as an authentic exemplar of Matthew ; and so little regard was
paid to it by the churches in general, that, to our deep regret

1838.] Matthew's Gapel. 163

and great loss, it soon perished, and is now known with any
degree of minuteness, only by bis report and the extracts which
he has given us from it.

I repeat it, that such a view as I liave given above, is the
only one which can reconcile these seeming inconsistencies in
the fathers between their narrations at one time and their de-
clarations at another, or between their language respecting the
Hebrew xaza Mat^alop and their habitual treatment of this
same Gospel. Whatever may be said of the mass of Christians
in ancient times, or of the great body of the fathers, we cannot
well suppose that Origen and Jerome, who shewed such strik-
ing independence of mind, would have thought b one way and
acjed in another, in regard to this whole afiain

Here then we will rest this matter of ancient testimony about
a Hebrew original of Matthew. We impeach neither the in-
tegrity nor the understanding of any of the fathers in regard to
this subject. We have seen, that in the state in which they
were, and that circumstances being such as they were, they
can not rationally be supposed to have spoken differently from
what they have done. We examine what they have said, just
as we examine any testimony of a historical nature; and we
find, in the result, that all which they have said can be ex-
plamed consistently with their integrity, and yet that such de-
clarations, in such circumstances as theirs, cannot establish the
point, on account of which appeal is so confidently made to
them. In a word, we may proffer as a cogent reason for pur*
suing the method of argument exhibited above, that we feel com-
pelled to resort to explanations of such a nature, by circum-
stances already mentioned and yet to be mentioned, which
seem to forbid and exclude the supposition, that a genuine He-
brew Matthew was current in the early centuries.

^ 3. Other circumstances which render the existence of an
early genuine Hebrew Matthew improbable,

I now proceed to redeem my pledge, by offering to the read-
er some further specific reasons, why we may call in question
the existence of an original Matthew in the Hebrew language.

(1) Those fathers who understood the Hebrew and were ac-
quainted with the Jewish Gospel, never appeal to it as of au-
thority, and never recommend it to others as such.

I merely mention this here, because I have already brought
it to view more fully, as connected with the preceding discus-
sion. The &ct itself will not be denied ; and when admitted
it is inexplicable on any satisfactory grounds which I can even

164 Original Language of [Jult

imagine, supposing the Hebrew Matthew to have been reaDj
genuine and authentic.

(2) From the earliest period in which we have any means
of knowing the state of the Hebrew Gospel, it appears to be of
the same character which is developed in the later fiithers.

Jerome (De Viris Ulust. c. XVI.) in his account of Ignatius
(fl. 108^, gives us the earliest quotation, I believe, from the
Gospel m question. His words are : ** He [Ignatius] wrote an
epistle • • . to Polycarp, in which he prociuces a testimonj
mm the Gospel [of the Nazarenes] lately translated by me,
respecting the person of Christ, saying: I indeed saw him
[the Greek here in Ignatius Epis. HI. ad Smym. is olda] in
the flesh, after the resurrection, and I believe that he is livipg.
And when he had come to Peter, he said to those around him,
Jiafiite, ^jffjXtti^iiattt^ fif, ot& orix itfii datfiovtop aawfiaroi^. Km
iv^vg avTOv fjrpapTO nal inlarivoaif"

Here is palpably an interpolation, borrowed for substance
from Luke 24: 39—41 ; and this shews, that so early as the
time of Ignatius the Gospel of the Jewish Christians bore the
same character as in after ages. Several passages from Justin
Martyr might be cited, which are of the like tenor ; but I re»
frain from quoting them, for reasons before stated on p. 144
above. It is possible, I admit, that Ignatius himself also bor«
rowed his passage from some traditionary source. But the
confidence of Jerome in regard to the subject, seems to be en-
titled to our credence.

(3) We have no evidence of the existence of any Hebrew
Matthew, which does not at the same time, whenever it is such
as is particular and explicit, testify to its spurious and interpo-
lated condition.

For proof of this, I appeal to all the citations made in the
preceding pages. There was but one Hebrew Gospel, of
which we have any knowledge, among the ancient churches.
Repeated testimony is given by Jerome and Epiphanius to this

Joint ; although Epiphanius shews us, that one part of the
ewish Christians, viz. the Ebionites, rejected the two first
chapters of Matthew. In other respects we know of no im-
portant diflference between their Hebrew Gospel and that of the
Nazarenes. This father says expressly, that he does not know
whether the copies in circulation among the Nazarenes ex-
hibited tlie like omission or not. But other circumstances, and
especially the testimony of Jerome, render it probable that thej

J

18S8.] Mattheu^M Gospel 165

did not. Every witness then that we have in respect to a
Hebrew Matthew, when 'explicit and full, uniformly testifies to
a spurious and interpolated Matthew, and to nothing ebe.
Had there been any other in circulation, it could not have es^
caped the knowledge of some of the fathers, especially of
Origen and Jerome.

(4) It is a fact, of which no one can give any satisfactory
account in case a genuine Hebrew Matthew were extant in early
ages, that antiquity knows nothing of the fate of it. This is
the case, although we are told by many critics that such a
Matthew was in extensive circulation, and was regarded as the
ori^nal Scripture of Matthew. How is it that such men as
Origen and Jerome should sleep over this subject, and be utter-
ly silent 7 And especially Jerome, who went even to Syria to
get a copy of the spurious Nazarene Gospel. It cannot be
justly pretended, that any testimony which we have, respects
any other Hebrew Gospel than that which Jerome translated,
nor any other than that which even in the time of Ignatius was
grossly interpolated.

(5^ Nothing can be more certain, than that more or less of
the Jews, from the eariiest age of Christianity downwards, be-
longed to the church catholic, assented to the doctrines of Paul,
•and rejected the opinions of the Judaizing Christians. Now if
these Jews could read Hebrew, (and who will say that at least
some of them could not ?) what reason can be ofiered why
they should not have held on to the original Hebrew Matthew,
anci thus have preserved it in the church catholic? No good
reason can be assigned, to account in a satisfactory manner for
this.

(6) That a genuine Hebrew Matthew did not exist in the
early part of the second century, seems to be rendered almost
certain from a very curious but interesting fact in regard to the
Peshito or old Syriac Version of the New Testament, which is
demonstrably and confessedly made from our canonical Greek
Matthew.

That this Version was made in the second century, and
probably during the first half of it, seems now to be generally
admitted. The fact that in its original state it does not con-
tun the epistle of James, the second of Peter, the second and
third of John, and the Apocalypse, is conclusive evidence that
the Version was made before a corpus of the New Testament
books had got into circulation. Of course it must have been
made sometime before the end of the second century.

166 Original Lcmguage of [Jolt

It could ba^e easily been made at that period. The Sjrriaiis
had a literature of their own early in the second century ^aod
one of great celebrity. Bardesanes flourished during this pe*
nod, and likewise his son Harmonius. Of the former Jerome
says (De Vir. lUustr. c. 33), that '^ he wrote almost an infinite
number of treatises against the heretics, and a /tier dari$simiu
et for tissimus de fatOy "which he sent to M. Aurelius Antoni-
nus. Many other books he wrote," adds Jerome, " concerning
persecution, which his followers translated from the Syriac into
Greek. Si autem (says he further in respect to these books)
tanta vis est et fulgor in interpretatione, quantum putamus in
sermone propria 1" Eusebius IH. E. IV. S8) calls Bardesanes
ain^g Uavmatog, h t^ xoip JSvgmy q>otp^ iiaXtutixtiitatoc.

Harmonius, his Son, was brought up at Athens, and rival-
led his father in literary eminence. He became the favourite
poet of the Syrians, in their own language.

It does not certainly appear that Bardesanes was acquainted
with the Greek ; although it is quite possible that be was.
Living in Mesopotamia, he was beyond the reach of much
familiar Greek communication.

Now in what language did he read the New Testament in
order to compose all his religious books ? On the suppositioa
that he understood the Greek, which may be allowed, yet as
he wrote so many religious books in Syriac, is it probable that
there was then no Syriac version of the New Testament? If it
be possible, it cannot, all things considered, be deemed very
probable. His writings must have been intended for those who
could appeal to the Scriptures. But to the Greek Scriptures,
the Syrians in general of Mesopotamia can hardly be thought
capable of appealing.

Here then we have a version, the Peshito, of a very early
age, in a language which was twin-sister to the Hebrew of the
day, yea almost identical with it in a multitude of respects, and
yet this version is demonstrably made, not from a Hebrew
original of Matthew, but from the present Greek canonical
Matthew ! Could it enter the imagination of any Syriac trans-
lator, that a Greek copy on any account, either as to authority
or language, was preferable to a genuine Hebrew one, sup-
posing such an one to be current ? It is almost absurd to sup-
pose it. The business of translating into Syriac was more than
three quarters done to hand, when a Syro-Chaldaic original of
Matthew was obtained. All was plain, obvious, easy. But a

1888*] Matth^M Gotpel 167

Gretk origiDal demanded much care, and not a litde skill*
That skill has indeed been exhibited fully ; a noble version the
Peshito is^ truly ; but then the time and pains it must have cost
were wasted, in case an original Syro-Chaldaic Matthew could
have been obtained.

Could it not be, if it were extant and current among Jewish
Christians ? Most certainly it could. Jerome tells us, at the
close of the fourth century, that he himself went into Syria^ in
order to get a copy of the Nazarene Matthew. We know,
also, that in the second quarter, or rather we may say, near the
close of the first quarter, of the second century, the Jews in
Palestine were scattered abroad, by the devastations of Adrian
which exceeded even those under Titus, over all the neighbour-
ing countries. That there were Christian Jews in Syria and
Mesopotamia, admits of no rational doubt. At all times, ever
since their captivities, the Jews had been scattered over aU
those oriental lands. That Christianity had been early preach-
ed and propagated there, the character and writings of Bai^
desanes and Harmonius are a sufficient voucher. It must have
been widely diflused in order to make room for so many re-
ligious books as these authors published.

I may therefore very properly ask Mr. Norton and other ad-
- vocates of an original Hebrew Matthew, how such facts as
these are capable of being explained, on ground such as they
occupy ? I am not aware of any satisfactory answer.

Will it be said, that after all we cannot be certain that the
Peshito or Old Syriac Version was made from our Greek copy
of Matthew ? Those may say this, who have never compaiea
the two. Those who have, will never think of saying it.

I have made this comparison to some extent, and in various
places. In particular, I have been carefully through with the
whole of the two first chapters of Matthew, and compared every
word down to the minutest particle. I had special reference in
80 doing to the question, whether these chapters were in the
copy which the Syriac translator used. And nothing can be
more certain than that this was so. No one word has escaped
the vigilance of the interpreter. With the exceptbn, that the
a used in the genealogy of Matthew, in passing from one link
to another, is purposely omitted throughout the whole list of
names, because it was not in keeping with the Syriac usage in
regard to compositions of this nature, every xal and ii'^nd yuQ
mod evp even, throughout the two first chi^pters, is carefully

168 Original Language of [July

rendered by a corresponding o, ^^ ^>s«. ^ ^^ ^poi« Even
the Genitive absolute in Greek, which so often occurs in Mat-
thewy is here rendered throughout by the corresponding particle

2Q with a verb followbg, which is the only way that a Syrian

could translate a Genitive absolute. The peculiar clause in Mat-
thew 1: 23, ^JEfifiavoviiX, o iat$ fAidsg/aifivofUPOv, fu&* ^ptmp i
^Wt (which Kuinoel disposes of in the summary way of say-
ing that this was undoubtedly added to the Greek version of
Matthew by the translator), appears ad literam in the old Syriac
In a word, no more doubt can arise, when one makes the coin-
parison between the Peshito and our Greek Matthew, that they
stand related as original and tranalationj than can arise whether
our English version was made from our canonical Greek text.
Nay, the Syriac is even a more minute, exact, and literal ver-
sion than our own.

So for substance is it with this version throughout the whole
Gospel of Matthew. One is astonished to find how exactly oar
present Greek text agrees with the Syriac. I consider the old
Syriac, indeed, a better voucher for the integrity of our present
text, than any other testimony that is extant'

The advocates for an original Hebrew Grospel of Matthew
are bound, as it seems to me, to offer us some solution of the
difficulty which all this presents in the way of their position.

Will it be said, that the Greek version of Matthew was the
one current in the church catholic, and therefore was selected
by the Syriac translator ? Such an account of the matter is cut-
ting the knot, rather than untying it. How came this Version
to be current — current before the close of the first century, as
we have no good room to doubt it was ? Were there not
Jewish converts in the church catholic, who believed widi
Paul and with the church catholic, and who were not separa-
ted from Christians in general by any feeling of alienation
arising from sectarian views like those of the Nazarenes and
Ebionites ? Surely this will not be denied. Why then should
the original Hebrew Matthew, in their hands, go into disrepute
and desuetude ? No good reason has been or can be given.
Of course none can be given why the Syriac translator might
not have taken a copy of the work finom them, as the exemplar
from which he was to make his version.

(7) I have read the present Greek Gospel of Matthew
through, for the sole purpose of ascertainii^ whether there are

1688.] Matthew's Gotpd. 169

any cbaraoteristics in it of a tramlaiton. If there are, they
have escaped rae« 1 cannot find them. The characteristjcs of
the whole hook are marked, and apparently decisive. It is no
more replete with Hebraisms than Mark ; and I may venture
to say, without the fear of being contradicted by facts, than
Luke ; although the contrary has often been asserted. The
book bears every where the impress of the same hand. This
will not be denied ; yet some attribute this to the adjusting skill
of the translator. But I do not find the hand of a foreigner
here. The easy, natural, unconstrained manner of an original
writer, b just as plain and palpable throughout the whole, as in
respect to any of the other Gospels. All that Mr. Norton has
said, and so well said, of the prominent and original characteris-
tics of the Gospels in other cases as still remaining, and not at
all obscured by any interpolations or alterations, holds true of the
Greek Matthew. A foreign addition would be instantaneously
detected by a skilful reader, in case it were of any considerable
length ; and the constrained manner of a translator, especially
of an ancient one, cannot be pointed out in the whole of this
book. The dream of Bolten, that all our New Testament
writings are only versions of Syro-Cbaldaic originals, is now
universally regarded as a dream. But there is just as much
reason, for aught that I can discover from the internal state of
Matthew, to regard other books of the New Testament as ver«
sions, as there is to consider his Gospel as such.

(8) If our canonical Matthew be a version only, then who
was the translator ?

I am aware that this question is answered by appealing to
Jerome (De Viris Illust. c. 3), and quoting from bim the de-
claration ; Quis in Oraecum transtuhrit, non satis cerium est.
Truly, non satis cerium est. It would indeed be difficult to
discover who it was. And yet such a work as this must have
exhibited some memorial of its performer as well as the
many smaller and more insignificant works of early Christian
antiquity. Consider for a moment the nature of this case.
The early Christian church were so careful and particular in
their selection of Gospels, that only four of all the writings
which laid claim to such a character were selected. Yet one
of these, according to Mr. Norton and many others, was only
a translated Gospel. Still the original Hebrew one, if we are
to credit these critics, was all the while current and easily to be
bad ; and yet nobody belonging to the church catholic, neither

Vol. XII. No. 31. 22

170 Origi$ial Language of [Jult

Jew Dor GeDtile, clergyman Dor lay mmiy ever once proposes to
review and examine this matter, and correct any deficiencies or
errors in the translated Matthew ! The thing taken in its taut
ensembUy is palpably atonov ; it is a kind of monstrosity in criti-
cal history. It requires a large allowance of faith, in order to
be a believer.

Such are the leading considerations which seem to me to
determine against the probability of an original Hebrew Gospel
of Matthew. At all events, the wh<de mass of quotations which
we have from Matthew as a genuine book, from Justin Martyr
down throuoh the whole series of Christian writers, are from
the Greek Matthew. No other one is known ever to have bad
any currency in the church catholic. The presumption — and
a strong one it is under such circumstances — ^is fairiy against
the supposition, that any but the Greek Matthew was ever re-
ceived by the church at large as his Grospel.

^ 4. Examination of objections.

But there are some suggestions made against these views, which
it will be proper to notice, before this essay is brought to a close.

< Matthew wrote for the Hebrews ; and he could not have
been well understood, if he- had not written in the Hebrew
laoguf^e/

An easy answer to this objection, so far as it respects the in-
Ulligibility of a Greek Matthew, is at hand. Hug has shewn,
in his Introduction to the New Testament, Part II. ^ 10, that
the Greek language pervaded Palestine so thoroughly, that
scarcely any difficulty of this sort can be well imagined. It
would be merely to do again what has already been well done,
to repeat the arguments which serve to shew conclusively the
truth of this position.

A single fact is incidenta])[y recorded in Acts 22: 2, which
seems condusive in respect to this matter. Paul, at Jerusalem,
was seized by the mob with a design to inflict summary ven-
geance on him for having violated the Jewish customs as to
temple-worship. The captain of the temple-guard, however,
permitted him to address the Jewish multitude. This he did
in Hebrew, When the Jews heard their own vernacular lan-
guage, fiaUoy nagiGxov liavxiavj says Luke, i. e. they gave him
still the better opportunity to speak by keeping silepce. The
inference seems unavoidable, Uiat had be addressed them in

1838.] Jitatihetff's Gotpd. 171

Greek, which they evkieiidy expected, they could have under-
stood him, although they would listen to Hebrew with more
satb&ction.

No good reason, then, can he offered, on this ground, why
Matthew might not have written in Greek. Why not, as well
as the author of the epistle to the Hebrews^ whose work is now,
I helieve, universally conceded to have been originally written
b Greek.

Let us now examine another allegation made in the objec-
tion which we are canvassing. It is taken for granted that
Matthew wrote for the Hebrewiy and only far the Hebrews in
Palestine. Appeal is made to a passage in Ekisebius (dted
above on p. 158), in which he makes such a declaration.

So far as his authority is concerned, 1 acknowledge, without
hesitation, that he has faithfully reported a tradition which
came down to him. But this, like the other report concerning
the original language, we must suppose, in view of all the cir-
cumstances, was only what the Jewish Christians affirmed of
their Gospel, and which was received by others in the manner
that has been afaready stated.

I now venture to suggest, as a further answer to the allega-
tion we are examining, that the internal state of Matthew plain-
ly contradicts the idea that his Gospel was designed only or
Erincipally for believers in Palestine. Facts are what we need
ere, and to them let us now resort.

In Matt. SS: 23 the writer says : ^^ At that time came to him
Sadducees, oi U/oprtg fni thai iviosuow^ who say that there
iff no resurrection.^' Did then the Jews in Palestine, among
whom the Sadducees lived, (for few of these were found
abroad), need to be told that the Sadducees denied a resurrection ?
That party had no fears, it would seem, in developing their
sentiments ; as is plain enough in the Questions they put to Je-
sus concerning the woman who had had seven husbands ; whiob
the immediate sequel to the passage cited above fully exhibits.
Such an explanatory clause, then, seems plainly to indicate,
that the author felt himself to be addressing readers who were
not much conversant with the particulars respecting the religious
parties of Judea, as well as readers who were so.

In Matt. 27: 8, it is said, respecting the potter's field which
bad been bought with the money that Judas had abandoned :
** Wherefore that field was called ^e field of bloody ims rigf^
•niUQQv.^ Did a native of Palestine, where this report was

172 Original Language of [Jvlt

■

current, and the ground of it well known, need to be told that
such a report was often made within his own hearing ? Od
the contrary ; thb looks like telling readers abroad, what had
been and was going on in Palestine. I have cited the passage as
genuine, because I do not think its credit can be shaken*

In Matt. 537: 15 the writer says : " It was the custom of the
Grovemor, during the feast, to release some prisoner for the
multitude-^whomsover they might desire." And did the Jews
of Palestine need to be told this, after all their euerience in
regard to the customs and manners of the Roman Governors ?

Matt. 27: 33. '^ And coming to a place called Grolgotba^
i. e. the place ofaskuU^ they gave etc."

I am aware of the solution which Kutnoel and others of the
like opinion give to this passage, and which I presume Mr. '
Norton must also give, viz., that the explanatory clause was
here added by the translator. But as all the passages of this
kind stand fully translated in the Peshito ; and as we seem to
be well entitled to regard the canonical Greek Matthew as
having been from the first just what it now is, in every impor-
tant, and almost in every minute, respect ; I feel that this b
assuming too much, unless there were some kind of evidence
to support it. All the ancient translations we have of the
Gospels, are Uierd even to a &uU. See the remains of the
Aato, and compare the Peshito ; then read the versions of
Irenaeus and of some parts of Origen, which have come down
to us. Did the translators take such liberties with their
text, as Kuinoel and others bid us believe were taken by the
translator of Matthew into Greek ? Every one who is conver-
sant with the versions in question, knows well that they did not.

1 ask then for some other evidence that this explanatory
clause was foisted into the text of the Evangelist, besides that
of mere suspicion or conjecture. I regard the clause as thrown
in for the sake of readers abroad, whether Jew or Gentile, who
were not familiar with Hebrew, and would not know that OoU
gotha ment skulL

In the same light must I view the translation of the words
'mil 'maXafiaacifiaxeapi; My God! My God! Why hast
thou forsaken mel Matt. 27: 46. It is impossible that a He-
brew original could have contained such a translation. It was
itself more intelligible to its Jewish readers in Palestine, than
any version could be.

in Malt. 27: 6 it is said : <^ And on the morrow, whk:h is

1888.] 3btai9w'8 Ootptl 113

fAiva t^v napaoiMvijv, i. e. the day after the preparaHan^day.^*
Only readers abroad needed to be told this. The preceding
context shews what morrotr .must here mean ; and it shews, at
the same time, that this morrow was lata T17V nagaaxsvtiyn But
a foreigner did not know that such was the technical name of
this day, and so the Evangelist gives him the name.

In Matt. 28: 15, the writer says: ^^Then they who receiv<*
ed the money, did as they were bidden ; and this report was
spread abroad, among the Jews, until the present time." The
report mentioned was, that the disciples of Jesus had come by
night, and taken him away clandestmely from the sepulchre
where he was laid. Did a Jew in Palestine, where this re-
port was current and general, need to be gravely told that it
was current ? A reference to such a thing en passant^ we
might well suppose to be made by Matthew or any other writ-
er. But the communication of this fact as being something un-
known to a portion of his readers, we can not well suppose to
have been addressed by Matthew to his Palestine friends.

Will it be said, now, in order to avoid the force of this reas-
oning, that all the references to the Old Testament, the quota-
tions from it, the allusions to the religious opinions, customs,
manners, government, natural and artificial objects, etc., of Pales-
tine, imply an apprehension on the part of Matthew that his
readers are acquainted with these things, and consequently a con-
viction that he is addressing his fellow-countrymen at home ?
The answer is easy. It is just the same in these respects, with
all the other Evangelists. They, and Matthew also, knew
that their Gospels would go into the bands of Jewish converts
abroad, and into the hands of Greeks who were united with
them in the same church, and had the same Old Testament
Scriptures. They might well take it for granted, that most of
these things would be understood in neighbouring countries ;
and even with respect to those individuals who would not at
once understand them, the means of explanation were at hand.
Jews were scattered every where, who had been up to Jerusa-
lem to worship, and could give such information as was needed*

If it be again asked, why the author sometimes explains,
and at other times does not ? The answer is, that he supposes,
in some cases, the circumstances to be of such a nature as
might have escaped the general notice of foreigners visiting Ju-
dea, or of those who lived in its neighbourhood ; while in otheia

174 Original Language of [JuLt

he feels that there is no need of explanaUon on hb part. Of
this we must concede him to bare be«D a proper judge.

With these internal evidences in view, that Matthew must
have intended his Gospel for readers abroad as well as those
in Palestine, we should join the consideration of the state of the
Jewish nation when he wrote. In all probability his Gospel
was written about A. D. 60, when Jewish believers were to be
found in all the neighbouring countries, in Egypt, and throughout
Asia Minor and Greece. Why should he think of liaaiting his
eflbrts to propagate a knowledge of Christianity merely to Jews
who spoke the Hebrew language ?

That Matthew himself was acquainted with the Greek, would
follow almost with certainty from the office which be held.
Nearly all public officers were chosen from those. who couM
communicate with their fellow men by the use of the Greek
language. It was the general medium of official communica-
tion. It was at that day, what the French now is, and has fx
a long time been, in many countries on the continent of Ekirope.

^ 5. Was not the Qospel according to the Hebrews itsetfa
TRANSLATION from the Greek Original of Maithew, with in-
terpolationt and alterations 7

That tb'is Gospel stood related in some respects to Matthew,
is agreed on all hands. Matthew appears to have been its ori-
ginal basis. But that in transcribing, or in translating, it had
received many changes, is perfectly clear from the eztracU
that we have from it, as given us by the Christian fiuheis.
How can these changes be accounted for ? Or is it our camm-
ical Gospel which has been changed, while the Jewish one re-
mained true to its original archetype ? The internal evidence
in respect to this question is overwhelming, and entirely satis-
ftctory. The puerile passages in the Gospels according to the
Hebrews, which have been exhibited in the preceding pages,
shew how entirely incongruous they are with the whole teoor
of all the canonical Gospels, and speak for themselves, to the
entire conviction of the reader, that they arose from other sour-
ces than those of truly evangelical authors.

Besides this, there is, in the few fragments that we meet
with in Jerome who translated the Jewish (xospel, and whose
testimony can be depended on with respect to the matter be-
fore us — ^there is evidence somewhat striking, that the Nasa-
rene Gospel was rather a translation than an original.

1838.] Matihew'j Gospel. 175

In our canonical Matthew 33: 35, we have mention of a
* Zechariah, the s&n of Barachiasy ^ain between the temple
and the altar/ This passage has greatly perplexed all com-
mentators, ancient and modern. The difficulty arises from the
supposition, that the Zechariah here mentioned, is the one
whose martyrdom is recorded in 2 Chron. 24: 20, 21, and who
is there called the son of Jehoiada. Now this difficulty is re-
moved by the Hebrew Gospel ; for, as Jerome testifies in his
Commentary on Matthew ^: 25, that Gospel read the son of
Jehoiada. Sapit interpretem — ^is what seems obvious in this
case. The supposition would be quite improbable, that a
translator of Matthew from the Hebrew into Greek would
introduce the difficulty in question, by inserting vlov Bapa%lov
instead of the son of Jehoiada, Every probability seems to be
on the other side. The translator from Greek into Hebrew
got rid of the difficulty, by making what he supposed to be a
requisite correction of his text, and writing the son of Jehoiada
instead of Barachias,

Again Baga^fiSp (Ace. case from BagafipSg) is mentioned
in Matthew 27: 16. Jerome says (Comm. in loc.), that he
found in the Hebrew Gospel, Jtlitis ma^tri eorum as the cor-
respondent to this proper name. Now liere is evidently a mis-
take on the part of an interpreter, respecting the etymology of
the word Bagtefipiv. He supposed it to stand for ^intsn na ,
i. e. the son of their master or teacher ; whereas the plain and
proper etymology is ^^sftj *^a, son of our father. Here we
may clearly say : Sapit interpretem. If, on the other hand,
our Greek Matthew were translated from the Hebrew Gospel,
bow should the interpreter have fallen upon Bogapfiag (a
proper name) as the equivalent renderbg of lirtin "D, i. e.
jilius magistri eorum 7

My own inopression, firom comparing the specimens transmit-
ted to us by the fathers, iti regard to the Gospel according to
the Hebrews, is, that this Gospel is plainly and clearly a
secondary work, a mere compilation from the Greek Matthew,
with very many interpolations and changes of the original
modes of expression, translated into Hebrew for the use of
Jewish Churches, and translated after the Jewish converts had
separated from the church catholic, and were desirous of some-
thing in the way of Scripture whk;h would serve as a rallying-
point for their party. Nothing can be more certain than that
the Gospel in question Judaizes. It was composed, or rather

176 Origindl Languege of [Jxn*r

compiledy then, by some Judaizing teacher or writer, who took
Matthew for his basis, because he was thought to have said
nothing which would bring into particular disrepute a zeal for
the ceremonial law of Moses, and because he was long conver-
sant with the Palestine converts, after the death of Jesus.

One thing, at all events, is quite certain ; and this is of great
consequence in the matter before us. It is certain, that all the
knowledge we have of the ancient Hebrew Gospel, is such as
obliges us to believe, that it was a spurious Grospel, filled with
interpolations, some of which are so weak and silly as to furnish
conclusive evidence from their very nature, that they belong to
no genuine Gospel. It is certain that the earliest notices we
have of the state of this Gospel, all conspire to force upon our
minds the same conclusion.

As we know, then, but of one Hebrew Gospel among the
ancients, (some small differences probably existed between that
of the Ebionites and Nazarenes, and yet Epipbanius and Je-
rome expressly declare that the Gospel of both sects was sub-
stantially the same), and as we do .know for certainty that this
was palpably an adulterated, interpolated, and sectarian Gos-
pel— why should we persist in maintaining that the original
Gospel of Matthew was Hebrew 1 That such report was com-
mon among the fathers, I fully acknowledge. But I have
shown how this could easily be transmitted, as it was, and yet,
under the circumstances in which they were, neither their in-
tegrity or veracity be impeached, even when we withhold our
credit firom their testimony. Only two of them were capable
of examining a Hebrew Gospel, and those two have given us
extracts which show at once that such Gospel was a spurious
one ; and in addition to this they have explicitly told us, that
they do not regard that Gospel as of any binding authority.
Then the amount of all we know of the Gospel under exami-
nation is to its discredit ; and when also the amount of testimo-
mony in this respect is very considerable, comprising many pas-
sages especially in Epipbanius and Jerome, so that we have
somewhat ample means of judging ; why should we affirm, in
the face of all this, that there was a Hebrew Gospel entitled to
more credit than our canonical Matthew ? For such must be
the case, if our Matthew is but a translation from a Hebrew
Original. The incongruity of such conclusions with such testi-
mony and such facts — ^is palpable, when the matter is seriously
and fully examined.

1838.] Matthew's Ooapel 177

<^ 6. Conclusion.

It is some years since I began to suspect the common mode
of reasoning in respect to a Hebrew original of Matthew ; al-
though the confidence reposed in it appeared to be so un waver-,
ing on the part of many writers. Every fresh investigation has
served to increase my doubts ; and they are now so strong,
that I am forced to regard the assumption of a Hebrew original
as improbable in itself^ and as altogether incapable of being es-
tablished by satisfactory proof.

We may, on an impartial review of the whole case, say truly,
that there are difficulties on both sides of the question. How
can we dispose of the declarations of the Fathers ? This is
one difficulty. I have endeavoured to shew bow we can dis-
pose of them, with entire respect to their integrity, and with-
out impeachment of their understanding. What Papias said at
an early period, passed current afterwards ; not simply on his
authority, but on the ground that it was countenanced or sup-
ported by the testimony of the Judaizing Christians. Irenaeus,
who cherished a high respect for Papias, received his views,
we can hardly doubt, from that writer, in respect to a Hebrew
Matthew. If Eusebius did not the same, still we can easily ac-
count for his speaking as he does, on the ground of tradition and
of reports derived from the Nazarenes and Ebionites. And so in
the case of others. Most plainly and palpably the great body
of the fathers, in this case, are hors du combat as to any ability
to testify from personal knowledge or examination. Such as
had ability to examine, renounced the authority of the Hebrew
Gospel ; and these same fathers have given us extracts enough
from it to show, that they did this with good and sufficient
reason. In a word, all the testimony derived from actual knowl-
edge of the Gospel in Hebrew, does nothing but show that it
was a spurious, interpolated Gospel ; in many respects, indeed,
having a resemblance to our Matthew, in many others differing
widely and even offensively from him. Is it not time for crit-
ics to cease from eulogizing and defending such a Gospel ?

On the other hand, the facts adduced in the preceding pages
can never be well accounted for, on the supposition of a genu-
ine Hebrew original extant in the 2rid, 3d, and 4th centuries*
They are incompatible with such a state of things ; and there-
fore such a state is incredible. The facts cannot be denied.

Vol. Xn. No. 31. 23

178 Original Language of [Jult

They are not matters of coDJecture or uncertainty. The in-
ternal state of the Gospel itself proclairnSy that the writer had
foreigners in his eye when be composed it. How can a He-
brew original be admitted under such circumstances, and id
spite of all these difficulties? I cannot deem it probable; I
musft believe, that our canonical Matthew came from the hands
of its author as it now is, with the exception of some slight
variations in its readings occasionally, which are not of sufficient
importance to affect in any degree worth naming the question
before us.

I cannot even go with Bengel, who, moved by some of the
difficulties that I have suggested, says : '^ Quid obstat, quo
minus idem [Matthaeus] Graece eundem librum eodem exem-
plo scripserit ?" He means to say, that it is not improbable that
Matthew wrote his Gospel originally, both in Greek and
Hebrew, on the same exemplar; so that both Jews and
Greeks could avail themselves of it. Of the like opinion was
Dr. Townson of England ; and Ouerike of Halle has also
recently published similar views. But there is no example of
any thing like this, in respect to the Old Testament or the New.
The books of Ezra and Daniel, a mixture of Chaldee and He-
brew, still never exhibit the same matter in both languages.

The Epistle to the Hebrews even, was not written in He-
brew. The labour would have been superBuous.

Doubtless the three critics above mentioned were moved
with. the difficulties attending the supposition of an exclusive
Hebrew original, on the one hand, and on the other they do not
seem to have been satisfied how the testimony of the fathers
could be disposed of without impeaching their credit. Hence
they made a conjecture which seemed to reconcile both opin-
ions in relation to our subject. It is possible they may be in
the right. Yet when we consider, that all the testimony we
have of a Hebrew original goes to prove this to have been a
spurious and interpolated Matthew, why need we be anxious in
regard to this testimony ? It shows indeed that there was,
quite early, a so called Hebrew Gospel %atd Mat9aiov\ it
shews that the Nazarenes and Ebionites claimed this as ccxning
from the apostle Matthew ; but all this may be admitted, and
yet an original Hebrew Gospel actually written by this apostle,
be very reasonably doubted. The origin of a Greek version^
from an unknown author, and at an unknown time— a version
of such a book as this — ^buried in such inexplicable obscurity,

1838.] Views of the Early Befarmers. * 179

is a problem that cannot be satisfactorily solved. Still less can
the conduct of the fathers be accounted for, who never once
thought of appealing to the Hebrew Gospel as a document of
authority.

I cannot therefore admit the currency of such a Gospel — ^not
even along with a Greek copy. The conduct of the church
catholic is utterly inexplicable, when this is once admitted.

I must come, therefore, to a conclusion quite different from
that of Mr. Norton, in respect to the original language of Mat-
thew's Gospel. Quite as wide apart we are, also, in respect to
the genuineness of Matthew I. II. The question respecting
these chapters, however, remains yet to be discussed. After
the preceding disquisition, it may occupy perhaps less time and
room than the 6r5t question has occupied. But it is time to
close our discussion for the present ; the remaining topic of in-
quiry must be reserved for a future number of this work.

ARTICLE VII.

What W£re the Views entertained bt the Early Re-
formers, ON THE Doctrines of Justification, Faith,
ANi> THE Active Obedience of Christ.

By Her. R. W. Laodia, J^ffertooTille, P«. [CoolioDod from Vol. XL p. 481.]

^ II. Views entertained hythe Reformers on the subject of

Faith.

It is contended by some that it is an essential "departure from
the principles of the Reformation to maintain that faith is simply
an act of the mind, and is itself imputed for righteousness.*

* The fawih charge of Dr. Junkin against Mr. Barnes is, "^ Mr,
Barnes teaches that faith is an act of the mind and not a principle,
and is itself imputed for righteousness :" in support of which he
quotes from *^ J^otes on Romans^ p. 94, 95. To give the reader an
idea of the strong points of the evidence we subjoin a part of Dr.
Junkin's summary, viz. " Mr Barnes says, ' the strong act of Abra-
ham's iiiith.' He could not write without contradicting his own
doctrine. What sense is in tlie phrase, ' the strong act of Abraham's
act of the mind ?' It is impossible to introduce this definition of bia

190 Views of the Early Iteformers. [Jult

The reader by consulting the note in the margin, will per-
ceive the true state of the case, and render it unnecessary for
us in this place to be more particular in our allusions. We will
proceed to examine what were the views of the Reformation on
the points here in controversy.

[^faUh %» always an act of the mind"], without multipljiog mosi
strange and unmeaning expressionfl. If ' faith is always an net of
the roind/ and ^ not a principle' of action, who can explain the phrase
*an act of faith?' 3. If 'faith is an act of the mind only,' and not a
principle of grace in the soul, from which the acts proceed, then it
must foUofjD thai Abraham was justified hf an act of his mind, toluek
* was as much his own act as any act of obedience to the law.' Htn
ii is indubitably taught^ that the individual, personal act of Mrakam*s
mind is the ground of his justification before God, Not the righteoas-
ness of the Saviour, as the church has always believed, but the ad of
the man hvnsetfwBa imputed to him for righteousness. ' The word tC,'
says Mr. Barnes, * here evidenUy refers to the act of believing. It does not
refer to the rigbtequsness of another—of God, or of the Messiah.'
Now it is righteousness which justifies — when a man has the righ-
teousness required by the law, he must and will be justified by the
judge. If^ therefore, Abrahom's act is his own righteousness — is the
ground and cause of bis being justified — he is not justified by Christ^
merits at all, but by his own act. — Oh, sir, how difBcult it is to get
clear of the doctrine of imputed righteousness!*' etc. etc. See ** Vin-
dication," pp. 55, 56.

In relation to this charge Mr. Barnes thus replies : ** this charge
consists of three counts, or specifications, which it is necessary to dis-
pose of in their order. The first is, that * faith is an act of the mind ;'
the proof is on p. 94. In regard to this position of the charge,
I admit that I meant to teach, as charged that 'faith is always
an act of the mind.' And the meaning is so obvious, that it scarce-
ly requires elucidation. I designed to teach that it is not a created
essence independent of the soul ; and that there was nothing in
faith which could not appropriately be described by the mind re-
ceivingy and resting on Christ ; exercising confidence in him ; &e*
lieving his promises, yeartyig his threatenings, and depending on him
for salvation ; all which are actings of the mind, or are the wind
acting. And I do not wish to be understood now as holding any
thing on this point different from that which is here charged up-
on nie. — The second count in the charge is, 'that faith is not a
principle.' In the passage referred to in the Notes as proof, this
is expresst'y stated as my belief, that faith is not a principle. By this
1 meant to affirm that it was not any thing independent of the acting
of the mind ; any created or conceivable essence of the soul that was
lying back of the act of believing. — ^The third specification in this

1838.] Vieu>$ ofth^ Early Befomen. 181

The writer had read considerably in the older divines, when
this controversy was approximating its height j and was sur-
prised at the objections made to the views above stated, and
the consequences attempted to be deduced from them. It is a
singular fact that these very objections might be urged with
equal, if not greater force against such men as Martin Luther
and Francis Oomar, As these two divines have treated es-
pecially on this topic, and as they have ever been regarded
fair representatives of the orthodox doctrine, we shall quote
them at some length on this topic. Let us hear

I. Luther. In the second volume of his works (the Nurim--
berg edition^ printed A. D. 1550,) when treating upon Gen.
15: 6, he thus remarks : '^ Paul has fully established this as
the sentiment of the whole Scriptures ; a sentiment so hateful
and yet so formidable to the gates of hell, that all who believe
what God has spoJcen are righteous. I shall not therefore
darken so illustrious an exposition [of Gen. 15: 6] with any
thing that I can offer. I shall therefore be brief. Read Paul,
and read him with attention, and you will perceive that from
this place he erects that chief article of our faith, so intolerable
to the world and to Satan, that faith alone can justify ; and
that faith is to assent to the Divine promises, and to decide that
they are true. From this foundation the author of the epistle
to the Hebrews skilfully comprehends in the article faith the
achievements of all the saints and affirms that all these things
were done by faith. For without faith it is impossible to
please God ; and God, when he promises any thing, requires
that we believe it, that is, we conclude it to be true by faith,
and doubt not that the event will answer to the promise. If
you inquire, therefore, whether before this period Abraham

charge is, that I have taught, that * faith itself is imputed for righteous-
nesB.' In regard to this 1 observe, 1. that so far as I am able to un-
derstand the Apostle Paul, this is his very language, and sense—
•Rom. 4:3, 'Abraham believed Go<l, and it was counted unto hiui (or
imputed iXoyUr&tiy) for righteousness.' The word ' it' In our transla^
tion, I understand as referring, unquestionably, to the act of Abra-
ham's mind ; since his strong act of faith was the subject, and the
only subject of discussion. That it should refer to any thing else,
seemed to me a departure from all the proper laws of interpretation.
5. By being justified by faith, it is meant^ that we are treated as
righteou8-*-that we are forgiven, — that we are admitted to the favor
of God, and treated as his friends." Defence^ pp. 160, 161, 166, 167.

182 Views of the Early Reformers, [Jm,j

were righteous, I answer, he was righteous because he beUeped
God. This indeed the Spirit here wished to be plainly testified
(because the promise is in relation to the spiritual seed, as is
evident,) that they who embrace tbb seed, or those who be-
lieve in Jesus Christ, are righteous. Faith was strot^ in
Abraham, when, being commanded, he left his country and
wandered about in exile. But we are not all required to do
the same thing : and hence he does not at that time add,
Abraham believed God and it was accounted to him ibr
righteousness ; but he adds it here in this place when he
speaks of the heavenly seed ; in order that the church in all
ages might be confirmed. Because they, who, with Abrahamy
believe this promise, are truly righteous. The HcAy Ghost
wished to express this, in its own appropriate place clearly and
unequivocally, that righteousness u nothifig but to believe the
promises of GodJ^*

^^ How therefore did Abraham obtain righteousness ? In
this way alone, God spake, and he believed God speakkig,

* ^ Hoc vero est apostolice tractare scriptures, et statuere ilJam
univeraalem sententiam ipsis inferorum portts formidabilem et inri-
sam, quod omnes qui crednnt verbo Dei, sunt justi. Ne i^tur opci-
tnum interpraetem meis disputacionibus obscarem, brevius hie ero.
Vos Paulum legite, et legite attentissime, et videbitis ex hoc loco ex-
truere eum praecipuum nostree fidei articulum, nMindum et Satanae
intolerabilem, quod sola fides justificet. Fidem autem ease promia-
aioDibus diviuta assendri, et atatuere quod verae sint Ex hoc fimda-
roento author epistolae ad Hebreeos, erudite omnium sanctorum rea
gestaa includit in fidem, et dicit, ex fide ab eis gesta esse omnia.
Sine fide enim impossibile est placere Deo, et Deus cum promittit
aliquid, hoc exigit, ut id credamus, boo est, ut verum esse fide statu-
amus, nac dubitemus eventum responsurum promissioni. Si interro-
ges igitur an Abraham ante hoc tern pus fiierit Justus. Respondeo
fuit Justus quia credtdit Deo. Hie autem diserte id Spiritua Sanctaa
testari voluit, quia promissio est de spirituali semine, ut recta consa-
quentia statuas, amplectentes boo semen, seu credentea io Chriatum
esse justos. Fuit fides in Abraha eximia, cum jusaus deaerit patriam^
et se exilio committit. Sed non omnes ' jubemur idem facere : Ideo
turn non addit, credidit Abraham Deo, et reputatum eat et ad ju8U«
tiam. Hie aittem addit cum de coeleati semine loquitur, ad eccleaiam
omnium temporum confirmandum : quod qui cum Abraha boie pro-
missioni credunt, vere stmt justi. Hanc sententiam in hoc taoqnam
maxime proprio loco voluit Spiritus Sanctus diserte et clare propone-
re, quod justitia nihil sit, nisi credere promittenti Deo." Ut nipra,
p. 55, 56.

1838.] Views of the Early Refamen. 183

But the Holy Spirit appears, (a witness worthy of belief,) and
aiKmu that this oelievtr^^ or this faith itself is righteousness.
Or that it is by God himself imputed for righteousness, and that
it is regarded as righteousness. But because the words which
the Lord speaks, especially concern the spiritual seed, Christ ;
Paul unfolds this naystery, and openly declares that righteous-
ness is by faith in Christ. In this doctrine, therefore, we ac-
quiesce, nor can we suffer ourselves to be driven from it by the
ravings of the devil, or of popes. One proof that Satan
hates this doctrine is, that not only in our time does he with
the greatest hostility contend against it, and impudently blas-
pheme and condemn it through his popish satellites ; but the
Jewish rabbins here also make known their folly and the fu-
rious hatred which they bear to Christ. For they read this
place as follows : Abraham believed, in God and thought to
him in righteousness : that is, he believed the Lord, and thought
that he was righteous, and that he would grant to him a seed
because he was righteous : that is, because he regarded the
merits and holiness of father Abraham : an idea that is truly
worthy of rabbins and enemies of Christ. For in this manner
the whole doctrine is reversed ; the promise and the grace is
excluded, and human righteousness established ; when Paul
from this very place earnestly opposes this same sentiment as
both false and impious.

'^ About the word 3'4^n, I shall not much contend ; for
whether you understand it as signifying to account, or to esteem,
it amounts to the same. For when the Divine Being thinks
of me that I am righteous, that my sins are forgiven, that I am
freed from eternal death, and I, with thankfulness apprehend,
as a matter of faith, this thought of God concerning me, truly I
am righteous ; not indeed by my oton works, but by that faith
by which I apprehend the divine thought. For the thought of
God is infallible truth : therefore when 1 lay hold on it, with a
strong exercise of m/7, (not with a vague and doubtful opin-
ion,) I am righteous. For faith's a sure and certain belief, or
confidence concerning God, that through Christ he is propitious,
— that through Christ he thinks thoughts of peace concerning
OS, and not thoughts of affliction or of anger. For the thought
or promise of God, and the faith by which I lay hold on that
promise are related to each other. Paul therefore rightly trans-
lates the verb (ii?n) by the verb, Aoyt£w^a*; because it
also alludes to the thought as being a verb of accounting. For

184 Views of the Early Reformers. [July

if yon wUl believe the promises made by Oody Ood wiU ac-
count you righteous J^ *

'^ He therefore who believes God promismg, who feels that
he is true, and that he will perform whatever he has promised,
such an one is righteous, or accounted so. Faith most US'
suredly is nothing more, nor is it possible for it to be any
thing more than assent to the promise. And if this assent u
counted for righteousness, why does the iosane sophist assert
that it is love, hope, and other virtues ? Faith alone lays hold

* " Quomodo igitur acquisivit justitiam ? Hoc boIo modo> Quod
Deu8 loquitur, et Abraham loquenti Deo crediL. Accedit autem Spir-
itus Sanctus, testis fide dignus, ec al^rmat hoc ipsum credere, aeu
banc ipsatn fidem, esse justltiam, seu hnputari ab ipso Deo pro justi-
tia, et haberi pro justitia. Quia autem verba quae Dominus loqui-
tur, praecipue respiciunt semen spirituals, Christum : evolvit Pauhis
mysterium hoc, et clare pronunciat justitiam esse per fidem in Chris-
turo. In hac igitur sententia acquiescamus, nee ab ea dimoveri nos
furoribus 8atanae et Pontificura sinamus. Argumento autem est
quam Satan banc sententiam oderit, quod non solum hodie per Pon-
tificias larvas, sic earn hostiliter irapugnat, et impudenter hlaspheroat,
ac daninaL Sed Rabbini Judaeorum hie quoque suam stultitiaro, et
fbrorem suum, quern contra Christum babent, patefaciunt. Sic enim
bunc locum legunt : Credidit Abraham in Deo, et cogitavit ei in jus-
titia, hoc est Abraham credidit Domino, et cogitavit Deum esse jus-
tiiro et daturum ei semen, quia sit Justus, hoc est, quia respiciat men-
ta et sanctitatem patris Abraham. Dtgna profecto Rabbinis et bosd-
bus Christ! cogitatio. Hoc enim modo tota sententia invertitur, ex-
cluditur promissio et gratia, ac stabilitur justitia bumana : cum Pau-
lus ex hoc ipso loco gravissimo earn sententiam, tanquam fiailsani et
impiam, oppugnet. De verbo S'vDtT non valde repugno, aive id pro
reputare sive cogitare accipias, nam res eodem redit. Cum enim di-
▼ina majestas de me cogitet, me esse justum, mi hi esse remissa pec-
cata, me liberum esse a morte aeterna, et ego cum gratiarum actions
in fide banc cogitationem Dei de me apprehendo, vere sum Justus,
non meis operibus, sed Me qua apprehendo cogitationem divioain.
Nam Dei cogitatio est infallibus Veritas. Igitur cum earn apprebeo-
do, firma cogitatione, non vaga opinione et dubia, Justus sum. Fides
^est enim firma et certa seu cogitatio seu fiducta de Deo, quod per
Christum sit propitius, quod per Christum cogitet de nobis cogitationes
pacis, non aJfiictionis aut irae. Relativa enim baec sunt, cogitatio
Dei, seu promissio, et fides qua promiasionem Dei apprehendo. Recte
igitur Paijjj us, verbum 3\c1rr reddidit per verbum loyiijh^tu quodetiani
ad cogitationem alludit, sicut reputandi verbum. Si enim tu Deo
proniittenti credia, Deus te repu tat justum.** Ihid. p. 56.

1838.] Viewi of the Early Reformers. 185

on the promise ; it believes in the promises of God ; it stretch-
es forth its hand to Grod who is ofiering something, and receives
it. This is the appropriate work of faith alone. This id
the clear and indubitable testimony of Scripture, that the right-
eousness of faith is imputed, i. e. that Abraham believing in
God i3 reputed by God as righteous. This the Scripture says
not of works. Let this distinction, therefore, be observed, that
faith which contracts with God promising, and accepts his
fromise,that alone justHies. The difference, therefore, of the
faith of Abraham and of our faith is nothing but this ; Abraham
believed in Christ to be exhibited, and we believe in him al-
ready exhibited. And by this faith we aU are justified. The
whole matter consists in this, that Abraham believed God and
it was counted to him for righteousness ; that if, he was by 6e-
lieving made righteous ahd an heir of eternal life"*

We have been thus particular, lest it should be suspected
that we have misrepresented the doctrine of this great reform-
er. Let his views be compared with those, against which so
^ serious exception has been taken, and it will be perceived that the
rejection of either, must be followed by the rejection of both.
The views of Luther, however, on the subject of jusu6cation
and faith, cannot be consistently rejected by Calvinists.

II. Our second witness shall be the Augsburg Confession.
This c/Blebrated symbol was prepared for the purpose of
making known to Europe the doctrines of the Reformation ;
and also to correct the flagrant misrepresentation and calumny

* *^Qui igitur promittenti Deo credit, qui sentit eum esse ve-
racem, et esse praestitururo quicquid promiserit, hie est Justus, sea
reputatur Justus. — Profecto fides aliud nihil est, nee aJiud potest, qitam
asseDtiri promisaioDi. Si autem bic assensus reputatur pro justitia,
cur insane sophista, asseris dUectionem, spem, et alias virtu tea.
— Sola autem fides apprehendit promissionem, credit promittenti Deo,
Deo porrigente aliquid ad mo vet manum, et id accipit. Hoc propri-
um scflius fidet opus est. — Scripturae autem testimonium hie clarum
et indubitatnm est, quod fidei imputatur jiistitia, hoc est, quod Deo
credens Abraham, reputatur a Deo Justus : Hoc non pronunciat Scrip*
tura de operibus.— Retinenda igitur distinctio baec est, quod fides
quae agit cum Deo promittente, et ejus promissionem accipit, haeo
sola justjficat. — Differentia igitur fidei Abrahae et nostrae nulla alia
eat, nisi quod Abraham credidit in Christum exhibendiim, nos credi-
mus in ezbibitum jam. Et ilia fide justificarour orones.— Tota res in
eo consistit, quod Abraham Deo credidit, et reputatum est ei ad jus-
titiam, hoe est, quod credendo factus est Justus, et baeres aetemi
regni." Vide tU SuprOj pp. 57, 58.

Vol. XII. No. 31. 84

186 Viewi of the Early Ref<Mrmer$. [July

up as
v. at

which the papists had circulated respecting them. It is the
joint production of Luther, Melancthon, Bugenhagen, and
Jonas, who were appointed by the elector of ^xony to draw
a sketch of their doctrines to lay before the emperor Charles
Augsburg. For he bad commanded the convention of a
diet at this place, for the purpose of terminating the disputes
between the Pope and the princes who favored the Reforma-
tion. It was held June 25, anno 1530. The fourth article is
on the subject of justification, and thus reads:* ^'The
churches teach that men cannot be justified before God, by
their own strength, merits or works ; but that they are justified
for Christ's sake, when they believe themselves to be received
into favor^ and their sins forgiven on account of Christ, who
by his death made satisfaction for our sins. This faith God
imputes to us for righteousneuJ^ The reader cannot but be
struck with the similiarity between the language of this article
on this subject, and the language of Luther above quoted.

III. During the preceding year was held the Colloquium
Marpurgensef in whose Acts are contained the senuments ci
Ldttkerf Zuin^lius, and their followers. The reader will bear
in mind that the object of this colloquium was to settle articles
of peace and union among the reformers. We will now listeo
to its testimony. ^< We believe that we shall be delivered
fit)m this original sin, and from all other sins, and from eternal
death, if we believe in Jesus Christ the Son of God who died
for us. Without this faith there is no kind of works, or con-
dition, or religion, etc. that can absolve us from a single sin.
We believe that this faith is the gift of God ; and that we can-
not acquire it by any preceding works, or merits, nor can we
obtain it by any exertions of our own ; but that it is created
and bestowed by the Holy Spirit, even as he wills when we
hear the gospel or word of Christ. JVe believe that this faith
is our righteousness before Ood.^'^

* For the original Latin, see Note Vol. XI. p. 467.

t '^ V. Credimus, noe ab hoc peccato (originali»] aliiaqae omaibtti
peccatis et ab aetema morte liberari, si credamoa in Filium Dei Js-
tfUM Cbribtum pro nobis mortaum : alisque bac fide nalto operom
genere, conditione, vel religione, etc. ab uUo peecato abaolvi pstte-
VL Hujuamodi fidem esse douum Dei, quod oullia praecedenubuf
operibua vel meritis a nobis acquiri, aut viribus noetrii parvi possk:
Sed Spiritum Sanctum earn largiri et creare, proat vult io eeidibHS
noetria qnando Evangelium eeu verbum Cbriati audimus. VIL Hs>*
fidem ease justitiam nostram coram Deo,** etc.

1838.] FieiM of the Early Reformers. 187

IV. T%e Omfesdon of Bohemia. We have not the origi-
nal of this CoDfession^ and shall therefore quote it from a trans-
latioQ* *^ Now this faith, (viz. justifying faith,) is properly em
assent of a vnlling heart to the whole truth delivered in the
gospel, whereby man is enlightened in his mind and soul,'' etc.

V. Moravian Confession, Art. IV. *' We likewise teach,
that we cannot attain to the foi^giveness of sins and righteou»'
ness before God, through our own merit, work, or satisfaction ;
but that we obtain pardon of sins and are made righteous before
t'od, by grace, for Christ's sake through faith, even by believ^
ing that Christ hath suffered for us; and that for his sake sin
is forgiven us, and righteousness and eternal life bestowed upon
us* For it is this faith, which Ood will account and iff^ute
for righteousness before him, as St. Paul says to the Romans,
in the third and fourth chapters."

VI. Cloppenburg, a learned and acute theologian, (but be
flourished later than any we have yet quoted,) after remarking
that, ^^ Justification in the Scriptures signifies absolution from
the guilt of sins,"* distinctly states that ^< it is a problem among
the orthodox," (problema est inter orthodoxos), whether justify-
ing faith is to be predicated of the intellect or will. It is worthy
of remark too that this eminent divine (whose only fault was, he
was too disputatious), the annihil'ator of Bedell and Smalcius,
and the companion of Spanbeim, of Polyander, of Triglandius,
and Rivetus, and others who were alike the glory of the church
and of the age, should pronounce the doctrine of Luther and
M elancthon on the very topics before us, '^ the orthodox doc-
trine" (orthodoxam doctrinam). Thus showing that on this
subject, to quote a primitive Lutheran reformer is equivalent
to quoting a strict Calvinist.

VII. Tilenus. " When justification is passively understood,
its form is nothing else than the application of faith ; whence
faith is said to be our righteousness "\

VIII. Oomar. For reasons already stated, our quotations
firom this eminent Calvinist will be extensive. For as in the
case of Luther, so here, we wish to present his views in full,
upon each topic embraced in the objection referred to.

Treating upon the nature of faith he thus remarks : '^ That,

* ** Justificationem io sacris literis significare absolutionem a roatu
peceatoruiD, credimua." Opp, JHU, 2bfii. p. 994.

t ''Paaaive cum sumitur juitificatio, forma ejus nibit aiiud eat,
quam fidei applicatio, unde fid«8 dicitur juatitia nostra.'* Syntag. Par.
II. Loc. XLII. De Just Thea. ¥111. p. 734.

188 V}ews of the Early Reformers. [July

whose subject is the intellect, and not the will alone, that,
properly, is not confidence* But the subject of iaitb is the ia-
tellect and not the will only. Therefore faith is not proper-
ly confidence. The proposition is true, because, by universal
consent, confidence is not in the intellect but in the will alooe ;
because by itself it is an emotion, an auction of the heart and
will, and thus it 'is defined by every one. But it is a contra-
diction to affirm that a thing is in the intellect and not in the
will alone, and at the same time that it is not in the intellect
but only in the will. The assumption is true, beyond all con-
troversy. For although it remain a question whether faitb is
partly in the intellect and partly in the will, it is yet by univer-
sal consent, from the general definition of faith, and from ihe
sacred Scriptures, acknowledged, that faith is in the intellect,
and not in the will alone. Wherefore, the conclusion neces-
sarily follows from the admitted proposition and assumption, lAiU
faith is not confidences^* With the premises of this argument
we have nothing to do. The conclusion to which Gomar ar-
rived was that justifying faith is purely an intellectual exercise.
Again. ^' The same thing concerning confidence is not ob-
scurely signified by some celebrated theologians, who, however,
in their definition of faith and confidence assert that the faitb by
which we are justified is confidence. An illustrious example
of this may be found in Dr. Ursinus, in that eminent work of
his, the Explanation of the Catechism, which is well known to
every one. After a common place exposition of faith, be, in
the sixth thesis of those . adjoining it defines faith as follows:
' Justifying faith is a notion by which one firmly assents to aU
things made knovm to him in the word of Ood^ and condudes

* " CujuB subjectum €»t intelleotus, non autam sola voluntas ; il-
lud proprie non est fiducia, Atqui fidei subjectum est intellectui,
non autem sola voluntas. Ergo fides non est proprie fiducia. Pro-
positio vera est, quia omnium consensu fiducia non est intelleciu, sed
in sola voluntate ; quia per se motus, atque afibctus cordis, ac volun-
tatis est, atque ita ab omnibus definitur. Contradictoria autem suot
msnifesta, idem esse in intellectu, non autem in sola voluntate: etsi-
mul non esse in intelleetu, sed in sola voluntate. Assumptio etiain
est vera, citra ullam controversiam. Nam licet quaestto sit, an fides
sit partim in intellectu ; pnrcim in voluntate : illud tamen, omoium
consent$n, ex Scripture, et genemli fldei significatione, notum est : fi-
dem esse in intellectu, non autem in sola voluntate. Quare cooelu-
sio, neeesssrio, ex vera propoeitione, et assumptione sequitur : jS4e«i
wm essejidueiamy Vide Opp, Dr. F, Gonuuri^ Tom. I. p. 655. m/#^

1888.] Views of the Early Reformers. 189

thai ike promise of the favor of Ood for Chrisfs sakey be*
longs to himself And the confidence in this favor of God
towards himself overcomes all fear and sorrow. Here, as others
are accustomed to do, he plaiDly allows that there are two
parts of justifying faith : the Jirst he places in a notion of the
word of God, to which be particularly refers, to determine that
the promise of grace belongs to hijnself. He also distinctly
subjoins another^ to wit, confidence in this favor, or grace. The
same further appears from the next sentence of the following
thesis, in which he describes this confidence in the following
manner : For the confidence in jtistifying faith is an emotion
of the wHl and hearty consisting of joyoecause of the knota-
hdge of the present favor of Ood towards tUy and hope of a
Jutwre liberation from all evils. But I affirm that the laitb by
which we are justified is not composed of this joy and hope.
Therefore the faith by which we are justified is not that conr-
Jidence. This appears," etc.*

We shall now bear his criticism on the same passage upon
which we quoted Luther so largely : ^* And Abraham oeUeved
God and it was counted to him for righteousnessJ**

* ^Jdemque de fiducia, a magnis theologis, qui tamen fidem, per
quam juBtificamur, fiduciam esse tradunt, in definitione fidel et fidu^
ciae, non obscure sigtiificatur. Cnjus rei exemplum illuaire, in egre-
gio iUo, quod omnium pene manibus teritur, explicatioDura Catecbet-
icarum D. Zachariae Ursini, edito opere, post locum communem de
fide expositum, in thesibus de ea subnexis : thesi enim aexta, fides
ica definjtur : Fides juatifieans tst notUia qua quia firmiter asseniUur
itmnibus in verbo Dei sihi patefactisy et slatuity promissionem gratiae
Dtij propter Christum ad se pertinere : et fiduda hvQus favoris Dei ei^
ga «f, amnem tristitiam tt metum superat : Ubi duas manifeste, ut et alii
sclent, fidei jtiatificantis partes ponic. I. Notit'mm verbi i>eij ad quam
refert peculiariter, statuere promissionem gratiae ad se pertinere : ae
distiocte alteram subjicit, nimirum fiduciam favoria i^lius, hoe est
gratiae. Idemque ex bypothesi, seu aententia proximo sequentia
thesis aeptimne confirmatur : qua fiduciam illam, hoc mode, deseribit :
Est enimJidueiaJideijustifiearUis motus voluntatis^ et eorJiSy eomposUus
ex taetiliOf propter certUudinem praesentia gratiae Dei erga nos ; et spe
futurae liheriUionis ab omnibus malis, Atqui, inqnarn, fides, per
quam justificamur, non est composita ex laetitia |>rae8entis gratiae
Dei erga nos ; et spe futurae lilierationiB ab omnibus malis. Ergo
fides per quam juatificamur, non eat fiducia ilia. Assumptio patet :
quia ilia duo, laetitia et apes, aunt eflfecta fidei justificantis : quemad-
modum inantecedente loco communi de fide, etc. ete.* Vide ut mipra^
p. 656.

190 Views of the Earfy Befarmen. [Jvlt

<< Besides," says he, '< for the active verb which Moses iis»»
to wit, imputed, read Crod imputed ; for which Paul has it in
the passive form, it was in^uted, to wit, by Ood. There b a
little change, to be sure, in the phraseology, but the sendment
remaiDs unchanged, as verse 6 also declares. As it is certain
from Moses that tovto iJiis, refers to the faith of Abraham, a

Suestion arises as to what is signified by this word! and what
id he intend to ascribe to him 1 {h was counted to him ibr
righteousness.) In answer then to the former question we re-
mark, that some tmderstand that word, and properly , to refer
to faith ; and others improperly understand tt to refer to
Christ, or rather to the righteousness of Christ apprehended
by faith. They think that faith is here to be understood me-
tonymically for its object ; as the word hope, is often used ibr
the thing hoped for. So they think that iaith is here employ-
ed for the thing believed in by faith. Nevertheless, in this di-
versity of serUimeniy even among the orthodox, the former of
these views is evidently the genuine one. It so appears from
the preceding declaration. ^ Abraham believed God, and this,
to wit, the believing, that is, the faith by which he believed,
was imputed to him for righteousness* For the pronoun tovio
or it, cannot in this place be otherwise understood* Neither
the truth of the Scriptures, nor ^e contex.t at all militate
against this construction.

'^ What Arminius, in his epistle to Hippolytes, contends for,
to wit, that faith ought here to be understood, and not the right-
eousness of Christ ; thus far he does not speak improperly, as
appears from what has been ofiered above. But the reason
which he adduces in proof of it is &lse, etc. etc."*

* ^ Praeterea pro activo verbo, quo utitur Moses, nempe imputanh
supple Dens, de quo in antecedentibus sermo, Paulus babet passive
imputatum est, scilicet, a Deo, vocis aljqaa mutatioDe, sed eadem tt-
men manente sententia : ut ver. 6 etiam deelaratur. Siquidem cum
certum sit ea Mose, subjectum esse tovto hoe, nempe credere aeu fi-
dem Abraham i : quaestio oritur, quid bac voce sigoificetur : el quid
attributum, (imputatum est et ad jusOtiam,) sibi veliL

''Ad prius, nempe fidem, quod atti net, qutdam accipinnt propria
earn vocem : alii vero improprie, pro Ghristo, aut potius pro justidt
Christi fide apprehensa, per metonymiam adjunct!, pro suo objecto :
queroadmodiim spes pro re sperata nonnunquara usurpatur : sic etiam
consentiunt, fidem pro re fide credita, hoc in loco, usurpari.

*^ Veruntamen in bac aenteotiarum diverritate, etiam inter ortbo-
doxos, priorem genuioam ease, apparet, ox prima atque aniecedeaia

1838.] Views of the Early Refarmerg. 191

Dr. Pareus has the very same criticistn on this passage : *
and yet this criticism has been objected to as discriminating
Pelagians, and Arminians from Calvinists. '

We had Sctdtetus marked for quotation, on the subject of
faith, but shall omit his testimony, in order to introduce a mat*
ter in relation to the question before us, that ought to be most
seriously considered by those who are engaged in existing con-
troversies.

The reader has observed that both Cloppenburg and Gomar
speak of a difference of sentiment on the subject of faith, pre-
vailing among the orthodox, {inter orthodoxos is the expression
employed by both.) Now this diflfereoce which then existed,
and which then proved not that either side were heretics, is in
our time considered, by some as utterly incompatible with Cal-
vinistio soundness. The view which huther and Oomar so
nobly contended for, with multitudes of other eminent divines,
is now repudiated as Arminianism and heresy. But the truth
is that the followers of Arminius originally opposed the doc-
trine of Luther and Gomar ; f though the views which they
embraced are now adi'ocated as orthodox.

aasertione ; eredidit Abraham Deo, et hoe, nempe credere, id est^'fides
ilia, qua eredidit, imputatum est ei adjuUiliam : nam pronomen joito^
aeu Ulud, non potest aliter hoc loco accipi, (quam vox antecedens, ad
quam refertur, et cujus loco, pro nature pronominis, elegantiae causa,
ponitar : deinde a propria significatione ad impropriam, atque inuai*
tatam ) in Sacra Scripture non est recedendum, nisi necessitas aeu Ver-
itas Scripturee, aut loci circumstantiae hoc flagitent, ut extra cona*o-
versiam est : atqui in bac sententia Paali, nee Veritas illius, neque
circumstantiae loci id flagitaut: quia attributam illud, tmputtUum eei
et ad juitUioM, hoc non requirit : nam vera eat aaaertio servata aub-
jecti, nempe fidei propria significatione, neque ulia cireumstaotia hu-
jua loci repugnat

" duod vero Arminius in epistola ad Hippolytum, legatum Palati-
num, contendit, fidem proprie debere accept, non autem iroproprie
pro justitia Christi : hacteuus non mali loquitur, ut ex antecedentifoua
patet : sed ratio, quam illi rei probandae adducit, falsa eat, eta ete.*^
Ill sup. Vol. I. 396, 397.

* See Comment in EpisL ad Romanos, by David Pareus. Opp. Parei,
Vol. I. Part III. p. 103. and Part I. p. 193.

t We could multiply quotations, but the following will suffice :
^ Est autem fides in Christum aaaenaua fiducialis Evangelic adhibitua^
quo arguanantia aive extrioseeia, aive ipai Evangelic inaitia peranaaua,
statue vera erne oaania ea, quae Evangalio continenttir, Inqoe Deo per

1 93 VUm of th^ Early Refomen. [ Jult

The fact is that there then exbted among the orthodox, Ae
same difference on the subject of faith, that now exists betweea
the contending parties in the community referred to. Yet tbey
lived in peace and harmony , and considered each other as sound
in their views.

We have seen then how expressly Luther, Gomar, and
others have maintained that faith is not confidence^ and that
'* it isy and can be, nothing more than assent f^' or belief of the
promises: We shall now introduce on the subject the views
of a few other men, who have ever been reputed equally
orthodox.

We begin with Dr» Parens. In his Anatomy ofAnmnian'
ism he says : '^ To believe, is with us, not only to assent to
the whole word of God ; but particularly and properly to con-
fide in the promise of the gospel concerning grace and forgive-
ness of sins for the sake of the blood of Christ. Mark 5: 26,
only believe ; here it is used for confide. And especially hath
it this sense in the phrases to believe in Ood, in Christy etc.
John. 14: 1, If ye believe in Ood^ believe also in me; that is,
put your trust also in me ; for here he comforts his aposdes.
John. 9: 36, Who is the Lord that I may believe in him? — ^for
that I may confide in him. Saving faith is with us united
with confidence in the promise of the gospel, or of the prom-
ised mercy of God, by the forgiveness of sins, for the sake of
the blood of Christ. So that when we say, fRom. 3: 28,) that
toe are justified by faith, faith signifies confidence ; and to be
justified by faith is to be absolved from s%n by confidence in
the merit of Christ. This is the sense of the apostle when be
says, (Rom. 3: 25,) ^ whom God hath set forth as an atone-
ment through faith in his^ blood, to declare his righteousness by
the forgiveness of sins, that are past.' Here faith in his blood
cannot signify any thing but confidence in the blood of Christ.
But they who understand faith only of assent, and to believe
only for to assent, show by this that they would render John 3:
36, 0 Si aneid^wvr^ vi^ they who do not believe the Son,hj
they who do not assent to the Son : etc."*

Christum eonjido et acquiesca. Rogue Ildes non est notitia nuda eomm
quae Evangelio cantineniur^^ etc. Dispui. Episcopii, Par. III. Dkpttt.
XV. Thes. III. and IV.

* Nobis credertf eat non tantum omni verbo Dei aoKotiri, sad piae-
«ipa6 ec propria promiasione Evangelii de gratia et remissione peoea*

1888.] Views of the Early Refamers. 193

Oar next witness shall be Wenddine. <* Faitb, in its /brm
consists of three parts, notion, assent, and confidence* Confi'-
dence is the principal part of justifying faith, by which we
apply to ourselves the general promises of the gospel ; and
are by God accounted righteous for the sake of the merit of
Christ ; and by which we have a firo) persuasion that hereafter
we shall be heirs of eternal life. It is in respect to this con/i-
dence that faith is called saving or justifying^, For God can
justify no one unless he possesses confidence in Christ, and
firmly believes that his sins are forgiven for his merit's sake.
Hence, in order to salvation, a mere knowledge of Divine
mysteries, or general assent is not sufi!icient ; but confidence
also is necessarily required. But we prove that faith is confi-
dence. (1) From the appellations given it in the Scriptures.
It is called ^agaog, confidence, John, 16: 33, nXrjgoq>ogia, a full
and frm persuasion, Heb. 10: 22. See also Heb. 3: 6. Eph.
3: 12. These terms cannot by any means be explained to
signify only a mere knowledge of mysteries, or a general
assent., For Satan himself believes as to a mere knowledge or
assent, but then it profits him nothing, for by believing he
trembles. (2) Because they who truly believe in Christ know
that they have life eternal. See 1 John 5: 13. But no man can
know fi^m a mere naked notion and general assent, that he
will have eternal life; yea, even despair may be united with

torum propter Christi sanguinem confidere, Mark, 5: 26. Crede tof^
tunuHodo pro confide. £t hunc sensum praesertim habet in phrasi
credere in Deum, in Christum, etc. (John 14: 1.) Si eredilis in Deum
Hiam in me crtdxit ; pro confidite : Consolatur eoim ibi Apostolos.
(John 9: 36.) Domine quia e$t, ut credam in eum9 pro, ut copfidam in
eo. Fides saltnca nobis est conjuncta cum fiducia promissionis Evafi-
gelii, seu promissae misericordiae Dei remissjone peccatorum propter
Christi sanguinem : ut, cum dicimur Jide juslificari, fides fiduciam
significat : et fide justificori, est fiducia nieriti Christi a peccatis ab*
solvi : quem sensum apostolus tradit, cum dicit : Quern propoamt
Deu8 placamentumperjidem in somguine pro, ad deelarandum ju$tUiam
8uam per remissionem pecccdorum preeedentiutn : ubi fidei in sanguine
tnio, non potest nisi fiduciam sanguinis Christi significare. Illi vero
quod fidem tantum de assensu, credere tantum pro assentiri intelli*
gant, turn hoc ostendit, quod in Articulo verba Johannis cap. 3: 36.
o di imif&m i^ vii^ reddunt : ^i vero non aseeniiturjilio ; pro, qui
non crtdUJUio : turn etc. — Vide ^nat, Arminianismi, pp. 8, 9.

Vol. XII. No. 31. 25

194 Vietoi of the Early Reformers. [July

both knowledge and assent, as it is, for instance in the repro-
bate, and in all devils."*

T^lenus^ speaking of justifying faitb, says, ^' This faith is
called vTioaraatg, by the apostle, because it is not an empty
notion floating in the mind, but it realizes those things which as
yet are in anticipation, and experimentally unknown to us, so
that they appear, and exist. It is also called l^y%og^ because
it demonstrates with so much certainty to the mind and to the
hopes those things which as yet are unseen, of themselves, like
as the light with certainty declares to the eyes of the body,
those things which are visible. Heb. 11:1. This faith is not
only a notion united with assent, but also with confidence ; by
which the believer is persuaded that the promise pertains to

himself."t

* ^HacUnus materia Jldeijustyieantis, Sequitur forma^ quae oon-
Btitit in tribus partibus, nempe, notxtia, assensu, el fiduda, JVotifia
est prima fidei parp, qua, quae de salutis Dostrae ratione scripuira
tradit, seu quae ad salutem scitu sunt necessaria, cognoscimus:
Graecis inlyvwrig. Assensxa est altera fidei pars^ qua, quae ex scrip-
tura novimua a Deo reveiata, pro veris babemus : Graui$ fruptani^
S^aic. Fiduda est tertia et principalis pars fidei justificantiSy qoa
generales Evangelii proraissiones nobis applicamus, et dos, propter
Christi meritum juatos a Deo reputari, aeternaque vitae haeredes foKi
plene persuasum habemua: Graecis nXfi(^0(^ia seu vsnol&^t^

Respectu Jiduciat bujus fides appellatur salvifiea^ et justifiains.
Nerninem enim justificat lieus, nisi qui Jiduciam in Cbristu coUocat,
et propter ejus meritum eibi peccata remitti firmiter credit. Itaqoe
ad salutem non sufficit vel notitia mysteriorum divinaram, vel assensus
etiam generalis : sed necessario requiritur quoque^^fucuz. Esse autem
Merajidueiam probarous : (1) Ex appellationibus, quae in scriptura ipsi
tribuuntur, appellatur enim S^agtrog^ eor^entia, John 16: 33. nUiffO^
ipoQla, plena eiftrma persuasion Heb. 10: 23. na^^iot Ubertas fiduei*
idis, Heb. 3: 6. nmol&r^i^^ firma persuasto^ Eph. 3: 12. vnoatwrH
xw ekniiofihviVy svbsisterUia rerum speratarum^ quaefaeit res speratas
coram existere, Nomina haec simplici notitiae mysterionim vel as-
sensus generali miniroe cooveniunt. Credii enim Salanj quoad wh
Htiam et assensum cui tamen ^agtrog, T[XriQoq>OQki et naf^fftrla nulb
coroperit quia credendo contremiscit ' (3) Quia, qui vere credunt in
Christum sciunt se habere vitam aeternam. 1 John 5: 13. Haec seriF^
bo vohis, qui creditis in nomen FUii Dei^ ut sciatis vos vOam adenem
habere, Atqui ex nuda noHiia et assensu generali nemo scit se ritam
aeiemom habere : imo cum notitia et assensu desperatio potest esse
conjuncta et est in multis reprobis, omnibusque diabolis, conjuncta.
Vide Chris. Theolog. JFendelini, Lib. I. cap. XXIV. p. 544—549.

f ** Haec fides ab Apostolo vocatur vnooiaaig, quia non est inane
spectrum, in mente volitans, sed efficit, ut quae in expectations saat

1888.] Views of the Early Reformers. 195

PoUnmSf is the last that we shall quote. Id his system of
Theology, pp. 1883, 1884, he uses the following language.
" The essential form of samg faith is a fvll and sure persua-
siojiy an absence of doubt and disptUe, concerning the truth,
fidelity, power and mercy of God : and therefore concerning
our reconciliadoD to God through Christ. See Luke 1: 37,
etc. For which cause saving faith is not a naked notion, or
knowledge of truth to be believed, or even a firm asserUy but
it is also a confidence of the mercy of God and of eternal sal-
vation by and for the sake of Christ. This is clear fix)m the
following arguments.

1. Saving &ith is a liXtjgotpoglay that is, a full persuasion that
what God has promised he is able to perform. Thus is the
faith of Abraham described, Rom. 4: 11, and of Sarah, Heb.
11: 11. Now a persuasion of the power of God in performing
his promises, is not a notion only, but a firm and undoubted
confidence.

S. Saving faith is a strict acquiescence in the divine benevo-
lence and favor. But it is objected 1. That the efiect of saving
fiiith is not its essentia] form ; but confidence is the efiect of
fiiith ; and therefore it is not the essential form of saving faith.
The assumption is proved by the testimony of Paul in Eph. 3:
12, *' In whom we have freedom and access with confidence^
through faith in him." But to this I answer, that the assump-
tion is to be distinguished, because it is ambiguous. For confi-
dence in itself, as in the passage cited from Paul is a sure per-
suasion that prayer will be heard, if it be made in feith, and in
the name oi Christ* But confidence which is the essential
form of saving faith, is a most certain persuasion of the truth,
fidelity, power, and mercy of God, and reconciliation with him
through Christ. The confidence of prayer is rightly said to be
the effect of faith.

But it is again objected that confidence is the essential form
of DO intellectual virtue ; but faith is an intellectual virtue ;
therefore confidence is not the essential form of fiuth. To this

posita, eoque easentiae videntur ezpertia, ezstent qaodammodo, ac
subsistant. Item vocatur eXc/jfo^, quod tam certo demonstret menti
ac spei, ea quae per se sunt inaspectabilia, quam certo lux maoifestat

oculia corporis, quae sunt adspectabilia Heb, 11: 1. Fides baec non

solum notitja est cum assensu, sed etiam cum fiducia conjuncta, qua
credens persuasum babet promiisionem etiam ad se pertinere. i^fii-
Ic^. TYIefi. p. 709, 1063.

1 96 Vietffs of the Early Reformers. [Jult

I answer that it is true, confidence is not tbe essential form of
any intellectual virtue ; that is, of a virtue purely irUeUeciual.
But I deny that faith is a virtue purely intellectual. It is ob-
jected 3. etc, etc."*

Here then we find Oomar^ and Polanusj (to specify no other
instances,) personally engaged in the very controversy that is
DOW considered as separating Arminians and Calvinists. And
we find Gomar also, (who is, according to the standard of Tur-
retin a much more orthodox Calvinist than Calvin himself,)
taking that side of the question which is now repudiated as
Arminian. The very arguments that Gomar advances, Po-

* Essentidlis forma salvicaa fidei, est nXfi^fxpoQla idtaxifnog, id est
plena ac cerla persuasio, dtJntatumis ac disceptationia expers^ de vera-
citate, fidelilate, potentia, et misericordia Dei, ac proinde de recoBciU
iatiobe nostri cum Deo per Christuni, Luc. 1: 37. Rora. 4: 21. CoUoa.
2: 2. Heb. 10: 22, and 11: 19, quaeetiam dicitur nmol&fiaigfperguaswt
Rom. 8: Sa 2 Cor. 3: 4. Epb. 3: 12, et vnwnoung, Heb. 11: 1. Quo-
circa fides saivifica non est nuda DOtitia seu cognitio veritatis credea-
dae, sed etiam firma assensio, sed etiara vlhi^o<po(^ seu fiducia misa-
ricordiae Dei et salutis aeternae per et propter Christum. Id mani-
festum est ex sequentibusargu mentis: 1. Quia fides sal vifica estnltf
QwpoQia, id est, plena persuasio, Deum quod promisit, posse etiam ef*
ficere. Sic enim describitur fides Abrahami Romao.4:2],qtu>d/>Iefie
persucuum habuerit, Deum quod promiserat posse etiam ej^ere : et fides
Barae Heb. 11: 11, quodfideUm esse duxerit eum promiserat : autem per-
suasio de potentia Dei in praestandts promissis, non est tantum uotitia,
sed firma ac indubitata fiducia. 2. Quia fides salvifica est inuroa ao-
quiescentia in divina benevolentia ac gratia. Objicitur 1. Byfedum
fidtx sdlvificae non est esserUialis forma ^us. Fiducia est ejfectumfdei
salvificae. Ergo non est essentialis forma Jidei salvificae, Assumptio
probatur testimonio Pauli Epbes. 3: 12. In quo habemus libertatem el
auditum cumjiduria perfdem in ipsum, Resf, Assumptio est distin-
guenda, quia est ambigua. Nam fiducia in ea, ut in dicto Pauli alle-
gato, est persuasio curta de exauditioue precum in nomine et fide
Christi factnrum : Sed fiducia quae est essentialis forma fidet salvifi-
cae est persuasio certissima, de veracitate, fidelitate, potenttae, ac mis-
ericordia Dei, et reconciliatione nostri cum Deo per Ckrislum, Fidu-
cia exauditionis recte dicitur esse effectum fidei. Objicitur 2. JVW-
lius virtutis inteUertualis, forma essentialis est fiducia : Fides est virtus
iniellectualis : Ergo fidei forma essentialis non est fiducia, Resp. Nul-
lius virtutis, intellectualis, nimirum tantum intellectualis, tantum in
intellectu sitae, forma essentialis est fiducia. At fidem esse virtutem
tantum iiitellectualem, negatiir: quia totius anima est perfeetio.
Objicitur 3. Quicquid, etc." Vide Synlag. Ckris, TkeoL Lib. IX.
cap. 6.

1838.] Phihsopky of EceUi%a»it$. 19T

lanus disposes of; and the very arguments that Polanus urges^
Gomar responds to : each considers himself in the right ; and
yet each esteems his brother as a sound orthodox Calvinist.

We might show by other quotations that Dr. Gomar had
completely set aside those very objections which are now urged
against the view which he takes of Rom. 4: 3, or Gen. 15: 6.
But we forbear. The length of our discussion admonishes us
to hasten to the concluding- topic announced in the question at
the head of this article.*

ARTICLE VIII.
The Philosophy or Ecclesiastes.

TruMlatad from the 0«rin«n MS. of Dr. I. Nordbeimer, Prof, in tk« UniveMity of iht oitj-
of New York, by Win. W. Tnrnor; ud rvviidd by tbo Anlhor.f

** Rectum iter quod aero cognovit lususque errando aliis monstnit.*'

The book Kohehihy or as it is more frequently denominated
Ecclesiastes, has already been made the subject of laborious in-
quiries by many learned men, stimulated thereto by the hope of
being enabled to illumine the obscurity of its style and to ex-
tract the deep spiritual meaning which it seems to contain.
As each writer regarded it from his own peculiar point of
view, one taking it for one thing and one for another, it is easy
to imagine that its fortunes must have been extremely various
at various times. And thus in fact it was : for, in consequence
of the apparently contradictory nature of its contents, it has
been looked upon both as the gloomy imaginings of a melan-
choly misanthrope, and as the licentious suggestions of an Epi-
curean profligate ; as the disputation of a wavering skeptic, and
as a justification of God's providence in ruling the world.

* We regret the neceflsity of again postponing the remaining sec-
tion of this article. It will he concluded in the next number of the
Repository. — Ed.

f Written in the year 1833, as an Introduction to a new translation
of Ecclesiastes accompanied with critical and philological notes,
which may appear in future Nos. of this Periodical.

198 Phihtaphff of Ecchnmtes. [Juu

Some again, with the view of freeing it from objectioiis to which
it has appeared to them obnoxious, have even gone so far as to
convert it into a dialogue in which the preacher is made to
speak as a learner, the bold tone of whose language is rebuked
and softened down by the calm and soothing voice of his in*
structor* Another natural consequence of the variety of lights
in which it has been viewed, is that it has met by turns with
both advocates and opposers, and its tendency been regarded
as beneficial or injurious accordingly.

It is not at present the writer's intention to enter into a par-
ticular enumeration and refutation of the numerous theories that
have been broached and defended with greater or less ability
by others, but simply to lay before the public, in addition to
what has already been advanced, hb own ideas with regard to
this portion of Holy Writ. In order to combine the requiate
degree of brevity with a satisfactcny illustration of his positions,
he will confine himself in his exhibition of the Philosophy of
Ecclesiastes to a consideration of the two following Questions :
First, To what description of work does the book oehngl
And Secondly, What is its object, and what are its contents f
I. In reply to the first of these queries, when we consider
the form, the course of ideas, and the contents of the work, we
feel no hesitation in afiirming it to be a philosophic didactic
poem, whose design is to ascertain and exhibit the obligations of
man to himself, to his fellow-man, and to God. This proposi-
tion having been advanced, we are now under the necessity of
examining by the rules of art its author's style and train of
thought; these not unfrequently appear obscure and enigmatic,
on account of the apparent want of connection occasioned by
the rapidity of his transitions from one idea to another, now
proving and lamenting, now exhorting and encouraging.

The writer of a philosophic didactic poem, whose principal
object must be the development of moral truths, should seek
to avoid the two extremes of wandering too far into the realms
of poesy, or of restraining himself too strictly within philosophic
bounds. His style should not be too constantly poetic, nor
ever be allowed to become too animated, too lyric, or too pa-
thetic ; on the contrary, he should observe a proper moderation
in the employment of ornaments, images, and allegories ; and
frequently vary the tone of his discourse. Again, he should
not deliver hb philosophic truths in scbolasUc phraseolcigy en-
cumbered with proofs and explanations, or observe a too pre-

1888.] Phibrnphy of EcduiagU9. IM

cise order of arrangement ; but he sbould continually refer to
life and daily experience, never becoming cold and formal, but
moving and convincing by bis warmth and earnestness.* If we
now test by these precepts the work before us, we shall find
that it conforms to them in every essential particular ; and thus
not only will its obscurities of diction be explained^ but its enig*
roatic train of thought will likewbe no longer present such a
disconnected appearance.

Its style must not be too constantly poetical or possess too
much animation.

How sublime and powerful, bow penetrating and convincing^
yet how brief and simple are the descriptions and even the com-
plaints of the composition before us in comparison with those
of any other sacred poems of the East ! Let us for the sake of
illustration compare a passage containing the development of a
single idea with a corresponding one from that precious relic of
oriental antiquity, the magnificent production of Job. In the
following few words the preacher expresses with forcible brevi-
ty that which Job occupies a chapter in portraying with a pro-
fusion of illustration and poetic ornament.

*^ I returned, and beheld all the oppreaaions that are committed un-
der the sun. I saw the tears of the oppressed, and tbey bad no
comforter ; bowed were they by the violent hand of their oppressors,
and they bad no con^rter.

Then praised I the dead because tbey are already dead, rather
than the living because they are yet alive." — Ecel, c. 4. v. 1, 2.

And again,

^ All this have I observed during my vain existence : righteous
persons perishing in their righteousness, and wicked ones going on
long in their wickedness." — EccL c. 7. v. 15.

Here the poet has depicted the sufferings of the innocent
and the triumphs of the wicked with a few powerful sUrokes*
In the bands of Job the former part of the subject is wrought
into the following highly finished picture :

'^Why, since destinies are not hidden from the Almighty,
Do not his friends behold his days of punishment ?

The wicked remove boundaries ;

They carry off flocks, and feed them for their own:

They drive away the ass of the fatherless ;
The widow's ox they take for a pledge :

Tbey thrust the needy from the path ;

* See Eschenberg's Theorie der schonen IVissensehaften.

iiOO PhUosophy of EccUiiagtes. [Jvur

The poor of the earth are compelled to bide tofetlier.
Behold, like wild asses, th«y flee into the wUdemess ;
By their labor they seek la the desert food for tbeuwelrea,

bread for their childreD :
They cut provender for themselves in the field ;

And they glean the vineyard of the wicked:
Naked, they pass the night wiUiout clothing;

And have no covering from the cold :
They are wet with rain from the mbuntainSy

And lie without shelter in the rocks."

Job c. 24. V. 1— €.

The prosperity of the wicked he thus describes :

Why do the wicked flourish ?

Why grow they old, and even increase in strength ?
Their seed is established around about them.

And their oflipring before their eyes :
Their houses are free from alarm ;

And the rod of God is not laid upon them :
Their bull impregnates, and does not fail ;

Their cow brings forth, and does not miscarry :
They send out their little ones like sheep ;

And their children dance ;
They shout to the timbrel and harp.

And rejoice at the sound of the flute."

Job c. 21. V. 7—12.

What an essential difference here presents itself in the man-
ner of the two writers. One in the sententious style of a
philosopher expresses the conviction as the result ot his ex-
perience, that innocence suffers, while vice triumphs. The
other in a strain of sad inspiration pursues the subject throagfa
all its ramifications, and presents a highly wrought picture to
the reader's mind. The same difference is perceptible between
the two poets in their modes of giving utterance to the firm
persuasion, that with the innocent sufferer all will at length be
well, while punishment cannot fail in the end to overtake the
prosperous sinner. The Preacher says :

** Although the sinner commit wickedness a hundred times, and
carry it on long ; still I know that it shall be well with thoae who
fear God, because they few him.

But it shall not be well with the wicked, neither shall he prolong
his day% which are like a shadow ; because he does not fear God."

Ecd. c. 8. V. 12, 1&

1 838.] PhOoiophy of Ecdetiastes. 5201

His confidence in the ultimate triumph of innocence b thus
expressed by Job :

** I know that my Redeemer lives ;

And tbftt at last he will stand upon the earth.
And though my skin may then have been destroyed,

Still in my fleeh I shall behold God :
Whom I choose for myself, and my eyes look for without moving ;
For whom my heart pines in my bosom."

Job c. 19. V. 25—27.

And in the twenty-fourth chapter, after concluding bis
enumeration of the crimes of the wicked, he portrays their end
in these terms :

*^ He is light ujpon the surface of the waters, his portion is curMd
upon earth :
His way leads not to pleasant places.
As drought and heat consume snow-water,

So shall hell the sinner :
Friendship shall forget him — sweet food for worms !
He shall be remembered no more; wickedness shall be broken
• down like a tree."

Job c. 24. V. 18-20.

From these examples it will be seen, that while Job en-
deavors to adorn his ideas with all the embellishments and
amplifications of poetry, the philosophic author of Ecclesiastes
is content with exhibiting general truths.

If we examine into the ground of the difference in both the
style and general plan of the two writers, we shall find that it arises
from the opposite circumstances in which their productions were
compared. Job complains of his personal grievances ; his
bodily pains furnish the theme of his discourse, which conse-
quently turns almost entirely upon himself: while the preacher
directs his searching gaze on mankind collectively, and his
language partakes of the same general character with his
speculations. Thus Job, weighed down by the loss of his
earthly possessions, racked with bodily pain, and completely
overpowered by the mournful reflections which for many sleep-
less days and nights had been pent up within bis bosom, at
length breaks from his feariul silence into terrible complaints,
curses the day of his birth and the night of his conception,
curses himself and his destiny, wishes in the most solemn man-

VoL. XU. No. 31. 26

902 Philosophy of Ecdenoites. [Jolt

ner that be bad never seen the light, describes in his anguish
as enviaUe the lot of an infant prematurely bom, and paints in
glowing tenns the state of undisturbed repose he should have
enjoyed, had such been the fate allotted to himself. On the
contrary, it is not his individual misfortunes that call forth the
preacher's complaining voice ; but the sight of the distresses of
others, the conviction how often the innocent is made to bend
under the yoke of the oppressor, extort his lamentations, and
force him to cry out, ^^ Happier are the dead in being already
dead, than the living in being still alive." His dicta conse-
quently are of universal application.

A still greater difference between the two works wiU appear
on subjecting them to a closer inspection, a difference which does
not lie in the mere choice of expressions or in a greater or less
fulness of detail, but which pervades the entire plan and con-
duct of each. The preacher, sound in body and unrestricted
in his views, casts his intelligent glance over the whole world
and the occurrences that take place within it, remains constant
to his purpose of combating the doubts and removing the ob-
jections which either force themselves upon his attention or are
proposed by himself in order to obtain the nearest possible ap-
proximations to the truth, and of then laying down the results
of his inquiries in the form of universal maxims for the conduct
of life. With Job the case is entirely different : he, borne to
the earth by his own sufferings both mental and physical, breaks
out into complaints which drown the consoling voice of reason,
that vainly strives from time to time to make itself heard ; driven
to desperation by the horrid fate that has so suddenly overtaken
him, not only does his own reason prove insufficient to bring
him to a state of calmness and resignation, but even the excel-
lent arguments and grounds of consolation presented by hb
friends fail in making the slightest impression on his agonized
mind. Nought has the power of moderating his affliction, until
at length the majesty of God himself from the clouds, to solve
the dignus vindice nodus^ and silence him with the voice of Om-
nipotence. With a crushed and penitent heart he regrets the
rash expressions he had uttered, and feels his troubles soothed.

If we now compare Ecclesiastes with the golden Pioverbs of
Solomon, which likewise consist of moral aphorisms, cir^,
inoqi^iyiAuva^ yvoifuM ; or with the maxims of profane authors,
such as Pythagoras, Lucretius, and Cato ; we shall find some re-
semblance in tlie brief periods and condensed phraseology in

1838.] PhUonc^y ofEcderiattei. SOS

which they all have presented the results of their iDvestigatbiiSy
as also in the topics of advice, warning, and consolation sug-
gested by their experience : it being a common practice of the
ancients, before the line of demarcation between prose and
poetry had been distinctly drawn, to communicate the know-
ledge they possessed in short harmonious sentences. Yet, not-
withstanding this, they are not without striking points of dis-
amilarity. The moralists, we have mentioned, are accustomed
to utter their councils and warnings in language highly figura-
tive and poetical, and accompanied by a certain copiousness of
iUustraticm, while the Preacher lays down his rules with re-
markable simplicity and conciseness. In the Proverbs of Solo-
mon, wisdom is thus described as the greatest good, and its
worth and power exhibited in various lights.

** I, Wisdom, dwell with prudence.

And make myself acquainted with reflection :
Counsel is mine, and deliberation ;

I am understanding, and power is mine.
By me kings reign,

And princes decree justly :
By me princes nile>

And nobles, and all judges of the eatth.
I love those who love me,

And those who diligently seek me aball find me.
Riches and honor accompany me.

Dazzling wealth and virtue.
My fruit is better than gold, even than fine gold.

And my profit than choice silver.
I walk in the way of virtue,

In the midst of the paths of justice.
I give to my firiends substance.

And fill their treasuries,'* etc

Prav. c. 8. v. 12, 14—21.

The language held by the Preacher is to the same efi^t ;
he, however, enters into no minuteness of detail, but sets forth
its advantages m the following general terms :

** Wisdom is good with an inheritance, and still better to those who
know wherein happiness consists.

For wisdom protects where wealth protects ; but the advantage of
acquiring wisdom is, that she gives life to her possessors."

Ecd. c 7. V. 11, 13.

Another and a still more essential difiference b observable

904 Phihiophy of Ecckiiattes. [Jult

between the book of Ecdesiastes and the maxims of SokmioD,
Pythagoras, and Cato. These latter do indeed deliv^ their
precepts ia a style generally forcible and concise ; but, at the
same time, they are dogmatic, and on no occasion disclose the
mode by which they have arrived at a knowledge of the truths
they undertake to promulgate. The preacher, on the contrary,
seems ever solicitous to lead his readers with him along the
path of experience, and thus cause them to arrive at the truth as
It were simultaneously with himself. In order to accomplish
this object he very appropriately adopts the character of a
skeptical inquirer, and then m the presence of his readers ccmh-
roences his investigations : In the course of these be himself
puts queries and raises objections, in order, by answering and
refuting them, to exhibit his doctrines with greater perspicuity
and force. In the Proverbs of Solomon the beauty and ad-
vantages of wisdom are dwelt upon through several chapters,
and its attainment recommended as the highest object of human
ambition, but without any intimation of the manner in which
the writer obtained his conviction of its extreme importance.
The preacher, on the contrary, at once brings forward an ex-
ample drawn from his own observation, and thence deduces
the general principle which it involves. He says,

^ThiB wisdom also have I seen under the Bun, and found it im-
portant

- " There was a small city and but few men in it ; and there came
against it a great king, who surrounded it, and raised against it great
entrenchments.

''Now there was found in it a poor wise man, and he by his wis-
dom delivered the city ; yet no one noticed that poor man.
''Then said I, wisdom is better than strength, etc

Ecd. c. 9. V. 13—16.

On comparing this with one of Gate's precepts, it will be
perceived that the latter observes the plan adopted by Solomon,
viz. of bestowing his advice as derived from experience, but
without communicating more than the result. The words of
Cato are,

** Corporis exigui vires contemnere noli :
Consilio pollet cui vim nature negavit."

We now return to the statement made in the outset, that
the work under consideration is a philosophic didactk: poem,
composed while the investigations on which it is founded were

1838.] Phihiophy of Eoctetiattes. 205

graig 00, and executed in such a manner that the opinions of
its author are conveyed in the replies to the questions advanced
by himself; and this, we think, we have satisfactorily shown to
be the case. Hence there will appear nothing surprising in
the fact, that the pojst frequently passes quickly from one ob»
ject to another, and, after dwelling on it awhile, returns to take
up again the thread of his investigation at the point where he
had quitted it ; that at one time we see him proving and in-
structing, at another complaining and consoling ; and that in so
doing his style becomes as varied as his topics : for this very
diversity is in strict compliance with the rules laid down for
the species df composition under which we have ventured to
class his production. And tfab naturally conducts us to the
result which so many have endeavored to reach in vain, viz.
that although the poet frequently appears to turn aside from
the paths in which he had set out, there is constantly observa-
ble an internal bond of connection, a gentle gradation from one
division of his subject to another, and even from one scene to
another ; at the end of which he seeks to condense in one princi-
pal assertion the sum of all his experience. How this inter-
connection of its different parts, as well as the gradual progres-
sion of the inquiry through each successive stage, is discover-
able in the work before us, wilt be discussed at length in the
seouel.

il. We now come to a consideration of the second question,
'^ What is the object of the book, and what are its contents ? "
The only means of obtaining a satisiactory reply, is that of
having recourse to an examination of the book itself; and hence
the solution of the former part of the query depends entirely on
that of the latter. In consequence of this necessity of applying
to the body of the work for information as to its design, the
obscurity of its language, its frequently varying st^le, and the
apparently conflicting nature of the opinions it maintains, have
had the effect of prmlucing views on the subject nearly as nu-
merous as the persons who have engaged in the investigation.
But of all the theories which have yet been broached on this
head, there is surely none more shallow or more absurd than
that which regards the book of Ecclesiastes as the production
of a wavering skeptic, or which is worse, of a patron of in&deli-
ity ; since the very reverse of this supposition can be most de-
cidedly proved. If while inspecting a book for the purpose of
discovenng its tendency we meet with doubts proposed and

206 PMloiopky of Eccknoites. [Jitlt

positions momentaray taken up for the sake of iUustration, we
are by no means warranted in assuming them to be the authors
ultimata ; since such are often made to constitute the com-
mencement of an investigation, being employed by the author
as the means by which to arrive at his final results, in accord-
ance with the Cartesian theory that all philosophic truths tie
the results of inquiries begun by doubtbg. The entire hi^toiy
otiJcepticismy properly so called, from Pyrrho to Hume down-
wards fully confirms the truth of Kant's description of it, viz.

'^ It is a miserably preconceived mistrust, not preceded by
an investigation of the powers of pure reason, and arising
aolely from the failure of its positive assertions."

In like manner as this skepticism is prejudicial to speculative
reason, by undermining all philosophic knowledge, and deny-
ing to it any certainty whatever, so is it also dangerous to
practical reason, or practical life, when allowed to extend to
this latter. For when the mind, mtent on investigating all the
relations of life, goes onward in its activity without first ex-
amining into and ascertainmg its own powers, in order thereby
to regulate its demands and decisions, it is liable to fall into a
skepticism whose effects on practical hfe are exceedingly hurt-
fiiL Thus, the man who has resolved to subject life to a rigid
scrutiny ; to ascertain with precbion the obligations of man to
himself, to his fellow-man, and to God; and to institute a
minute inquiry into his future fate, with the view of adjusting
his life and actions accordingly, may easily, in forming his con-
clusions, strike into a wrong path, which, instead of conducting
him to the haven of contentment, may lead to his eternal des-
truction ; unless he first resolves to ascertain the extent of the
powers of his mind that he may know what as man he can ex-
pect to attain, and then sets bounds to his endeavors by
selecting some definite object of pursuit. For by entering thus
unprepared in his examination of nature and hfe, whenever he
met with the reverse of that which he had hoped to find true,
or whenever he came to a knowledge of the many unaccounta-
ble contradictions and apparentiy inexplicable enigmas which
exist in nature, in the fate of man, and in the relatione of man
to his Creator, he would either be induced to regard the world
as a vale of misery, and consequently drag out his useless life
in hopeless discontent ; or, disheartened by the constandy re-
curring obstacles to his progress presented by the levdviiig
course of events, be would deny the existence of every thing

1838] Fhiloiophy of Ecdetioiies. • SiOT

exalted in nature, and thus degrade himself to a level with the
brutes.

To set bounds to this sinful endeavor, and to warn mankind
of the danger attendant upon it, appears to have been the
principal aim of the author of this book. In order to execute
his arduous undertaking in the most effectual manner possible,
he adopted, and with great propriety, the Socratic or skeptical
method of induction. The main feature of this method con-
sists in a suspension of the final decision, until the truth has
been rendered perfectly evident, and the writer has it in his
power to make assertions that shall be incontrovertible ; hence
it is the most perfect mode of attaining absolute certainty that
can be conceived. In this manner it is that the aathor <^
Eoclesiastes institutes his examination into the powers of tbe
human mind, which he carries to such fearful lengths that
reason itself threatens to totter from its throne. All thb is
done in order to test its strength, and to bound its sphere of
action accordingly, to the end that it may not run in danger,
from the impossibility of comprehending the highest phenomena
in nature, of introducing into practical life the enon which are
the result of such imp^ect conceptions. And at last he ar*
rives at the conclusion, that as reason can know itself in the
form of human reason alone, it is utterly unable to penetrate
the ultimate designs of the Deity, or even all the secrets of his
works in nature, viz. that it can never succeed in discovering
all the bidden powers which are constantly at work in the
world ; and that consequently man has no right to complain of
the apparent contradictions he meets with, much less to suffer
himself to be led by them into error.

In the course of this skeptical inquiry, however, the author
does not always confine himself strictly to his principal subject,
but frequently enters, aAer the usual manner of the ancient
philosophers, into a discussion of individual cases of life, to
render more obvious and forcible the rules for its conduct which
his experience enables him to lay down. . This mode of pro-
cedure enables him to attain his object with much greater cer-
tainty than it would have been possible for him to do by fol-
lowing the plan of the proverbs of Solomon or of the verses of
Pythagoras. For to these latter a skeptic might urge all the
objections which the IVeacher proposes to himMlf ; while they
are totally unable to reply to and confute such objections, and
accordingly so not to effectually advocate the cause of truth.

Si08 * Philosophy of Ecdetiastes. [Jolt

The author of Ecclesiastes selected the method be employs to
the end that he might show at once to his readers the aianner
in which he arrived at a knowledge of the truths be engages in
propagating, what internal struggles their acquisition cost hira,
and how he succeeded in extricating himself fiom the perilous
labyrinth of doubt and . ignorance. In so dobg he exhausts
every objection that can be brought forward, and eflectually bars
all ingress' to the path of error by his ingenious and conclusive
reasoning.

Having premised thus much in general, we will now foQow
the course of the author guided by these views, with the hope
of disclosing that hidden connection which has so long eluded
every search. Throughout the whole performance we phunly
discern the author's design, which is to inscribe the ^ijA^r a/ay
on every human effort, mental as well as physical. The res-
son for this lies in his conviction that the majority of those who
feel themselves unhappy owe their wretchedness to ill directed
and ill. regulated exertion ; since, as too violent bodily labor
accelerates physical death, so does overstrained application of
the mind quicken the decay of the mental powers. This truth
has been well expressed by the elegant Herder. ^^ There is a
wilful destruction of the powers of human intellect, which might
be termed a most refined species of suicide. And it is so much
the more to be deplored, as it is met with only in minds of the
most choice description, whose delicate structure it either at
once or by insensible degrees reduces to ruins. Persons of
the most exquisite sensibility have' some elevated standard of
excellence to which they aspire, some idea after which they
msp with inexpressible longing, some beau ideal which with
fondness they strive to attain. Should this idea be torn frnm
them, should this beautiful image be destroyed before their eyes,
the heart-leaf of the plant will be rent m fragments, and nought
remain but its withered stalk. Probably there are many more
such to be found within the circle of our acouaintances than we
are accustomed to suppose ; for they seek for the most part to
•conceal within the sad recesses of their hearts, even fiom thdr
dearest friends^ the poison that consigns them to a lingering
death."*

How true, alas, is this mournful picture ! How many are
there who sacrifice in the search after imaginary felicity the

* Zerstreute BbUter, p. 80.

1838.] PhihiophyofEccleiiastes.^ 809

solid happiness they already enjoy ! Touched by this sad ex-
perience, the author of Eoclesiastes resolved on devoting his
energies to the composition of a work which should point out to
his fellow-men in what true happiness consists. In the very
outset he warns his readers against forming too exalted an idea^
of life ; since here no permanent good, no real l^'^tJV ^ ^'^ ^
obtained. Again, as tne world moves in a perpetual circuit,
so does the fate of man at all times retain the stamp of uni-
formity ; for, says he, " one generation passes away and anoth-
er arises, but the world remains ever the same." An idea thus
expressed by Lucretius in his magnificent poem De Renan
Natura :

*'Nec remorantur ibi : sic rerum summa novatur
Semper, et inter se mortales mutuo vivunt
AugeacuDt aliae gentM, aliae minauntur.**

Lib. 11. v. 74—76.

As this revolving state of things is the fixed law of the world,
man will in vain strive to free himself firom it. He will there-
fore act more wisely not to expend his strength in ineffectual
endeavors to attain degrees of knowledge and happiness which
are placed forever beyond his reach. To the same effect is
the advice of Horace :

^ Inaani sapiens nomen ferat, aeqoas inlqui^
Ultra quam satis erat virtatem petat ipaam."

The uncontrollable and restless eagerness which mankind too
frequently evince to arrive at a goal which constantly flies their
pursuit, can be productive of nought but the pain resulting from
frequent disappointment ; which truth our author confirms in
the declaration (v. 18), " in much wisdom there is much sor-
row." Thus too Lucretius in his forcible manner exclaims,

** Certare ingenio ; contendere nobilitate $
Noctes atqae dies niti praestante Jabore
Ad summas emergere opes, rerumque potiri.
O miseras bomtnum mentea, O pectora coeca !"

Lib, XII. V. 11—14.

How eloquently is this prolific source of human woes described
by Pythagoras in his Golden Verses !

rpwrji f 17 ^ifuf iail (pvair 9k^» ninaq ofiolvi^^

Vol. Xn. No. 31. 27

2 1 0 PhUoiophy of Ecdenastes* [July

tl^fAovift ill I iya&Sv nilag optmp oim iao^mvuw
tXrn ftLvown * Xwnv di xtat&9 nuvqo^ awhoffi.
joiti iioi^tt Pqox&v piitttH q>ifiyai ' if 9i iiolhdffM
SXloi in aXXa (pi^tnntu indqwa n^fitn t^wug,
* IvYQifl yiiQ avinmadbg''£Qtg fiXatnowra lil7i&9

cvfifpvrog, nv ov del n^oaaytip, cfxorra di ipsvyup,
Ztv naiBQt fl nolkAp m xox&p XvaHug ananoff

" Know thou that, as it beoomes her, nature io all things is equal ;
So shalt thou not dare to hope for the good that to hope is denied chee.
Know that the ills which oppress human kind are of their own seekiog;
Wretched they live ; for they se^ not, they hear not the joys that ara

near them,
And few understand to escape from the snares with which Ulb is

surrounded.
So sad a fate wounds deeply the soul. Like bowls on the grsensward.
Hither and thither they're borne, hiding griefs without end in their

bosoms.
Eris that evil com pen ion, secretly plots their destruction ;
Her they should flee, nor ever tbeir safety tnist to her guidance.
Jupiter, Father ! would'st thou all men from these evils deliver,
Oh, grant to each mind the power of employing Its energies rightly.'*

There is, however, this grand distinctioo between these writers
and our author, that the latter describes their endless aspirations
after unattainable felicity as unwise and unholy, not from the
mere conclusions of argumeDtative leasoning, but from that pro-
found conviction which is produced by experience alone. He
performs the part of mankind in his own person, steps himself
upon the stage of life as one entirely occupied with these de-
sires, and in awfully vivid colors depicts the fate which awaits
their indulgence : this is done with the design of working in the
most powerful manner, viz., by the force of example, upon the
sympathies of his readers, and of thereby saving them from the
consequences of tbeir unrestrained desires. ^ How admirably
does such language become a Solomon, him who had fully
proved every enjoyment both mental and physical that man can
taste ; and how powerfully should it affect us when, sitting on
his Ipfty throne, he declares from hb own experience, and in
tones of the deepest self-abasement, that all is transitory and
vain ! No man on earth could have made such a declaration
with equal power and efl^t.
Having taken (chapter i.) this part upon himself, and hav-

1838.] Phitosophjf of Eccle$ia9teM. 811

iog stated in the twelve introductory verses the main design of
the ensuing chapters, which is, to prove that all the solicitude
which mankind give themselves for the acquisition of real earthly
good must ever remain unrequited, he proceeds to demonstrate
the truth of his positions from the events ofhis own biography.
He commences his inquiries by a strict self-examination ; and
before he has cast a glance on the world without, he comes to
the conclusion (chapter ii.) that physical enjoyment is unworthy
the pursuit of a rational being. This he was perfectly war-
ranted in ajfirming ; for all tlie appliances of luxury stood at his
command, he tested them all, and found them all equally
worthless. He does not, however, stop at this stage of his re-
searches ; for he had resolved on ascertaining all for himself, on
exploring every path of human activity, to the end that his
want of success in the search after real earthly good might not
be attributed to the imperfect nature of his investigation. Ac-
cordingly he next inquires into the value of mental attainments
^v. 12)^ and also into the nature of the mind itself: but here
likewise he meets with nothing satisfactory ; for, although wis-
dom is certainly preferable to folly, they are still both subject
to a common lot. Proceeding in this manner with his self-ex-
amination, he encounters nought but bitter disappointment, and
b already induced (v. 17) to express himself disgusted with
life.

Such are the results of his inquiries as directed towards him-
self, from which he now passes (chap, iii.) to the external
world ; and thus he comes to a consideration of time and of
mankind as existing in time. He investigates all that relates
to this subject, and finds that Grod has indeed ordered every
thing beautifully in time, and that every thing is dependent up- -
on God ; but he sees that men act unjustly towards one another,
and mutually embitter each other's lives. He perceives that
the just are often wrongfully dealt with by human tribunals
(v. 16), while the unjust are permitted to escape with impuni-
ty : and thus the pious does not meet with his just reward in
this life, nor the wicked with his proper punishment. From this
he draws the conclusion (v. 17), that God will judge them both,
and will then assign to the just his true re warn, and to the un-
just his true punishment, in this manner the Preacher shows
that the grana argument for a belief in a system of rewards and
punishments after death, lies in the unjust treatment which men
experience at the hands of one another.

1

312 Philosophy of EccUnastes^ [July

Having thus arrived at the idea of God, the poet next en-
deavors (v. 1 8) to ascertain the nature of the relation existing
between man and the Deity, with the view of discovering in
what the superiority of man over all other creatures really con-
sists. He examines life in all its several aspects, but cannot
perceive that man enjoys any essential superiority in either his
birth, his life, or his death, in all of which the fate of every
created being is in all important respects the same. He, there-
fore, justly concludes (v. 21) that this is to be sought for in the
future after death, when the spirit of man ascends to dwell
with God, while that of the brute sinks into annihilation. In
this consists the preacher's second argument for the existence
of a future state ; so that he has already twice surmounted
those formidable barriers which oppose the progress of the ad-
venturous inquirer, and threaten to hurl him from their sum-
mits into the dark abyss of infidelity. Having thus rescued
his belief in the justice of God from the mazy labyrinth of
speculation, he is enabled to guide into the right path all those
who venture in spite of his warnings to explore by the glim-
mering light of human reason the dark and hidden things of
God and nature, and are thus drawn into imminent danger of
perishing in its tortuous windings.

Again fch. iv.) the poet enters upon the world's wide stage,
to view tne life of man as exhibited in society. And here a
sad spectacle presents itself before his eyes ; he beholds man
disconsolately weeping over the wrongs inflicted by the hand
of his brother man ; touched with emotions of pity and sorrow
he exclaims (v. 2), "Happier are the dead because they are
already dead, than the living because they are yet alive." He
proceeds still further, and finds that all the labor and turmoil of
men owe their origin to a mutual envy ; and that this frequent-
ly assumes the hateful form of avarice, causing them to hoard
up treasures merely to the end that they may become richer
than their neighbors, while they themselves are totally unable
to enjoy aught of the fruits of tneir parsimony. This sad ex-
perience suggests to him some reflections (v. 9), which he de-
livers in the shape of maxims, until he comes to consider the
conduct to be observed in drawing near to God, with respect
to which he gives (v. 17) the following advice. " Be on thy
guard when thou entercst the house of God, and approachest
to hear, against offering the sacriflce of fools, who do not con«
sider the evil they do,"

1838.] Philosophy of Ecck$iaste$. 318

Being thus brought to an immediate consideration of the
Deity, the poet goes on to describe further the conduct which
man should pursue towards his Creator ; his discourse turning
especially on sins of the tongue, to which men are so prone
that they often fall into them from sheer inadvertence. He
warns (chap, v.) against wordiness in prayer, since one who
speaks much is extremely liable to let fall some foolish thing.
In the Proverbs (10: 19) Solomon censures the commission of
the same fault in ordinary conversation :

^' In many words there is n6t wanting sin ;
But he who restrains his lips is wise."

This is also reprehended by Cato in the following words :

''Ramores (bge, ne incipias novtis auctor haberi :
Nam null! tacuiuse noret, noret esse loeutam."

Our author next exhorts to the performance of vows ^v. 3),
as a duty to which a man is bound by his words, and which if
left unfulBUed will only add to the sinner's guilt. Thus too
the Grecian poet :

Having laid down his precepts on the subject of our duty to
God with regard to language, he returns to a consideration of
the manifold evils which follow in the train of insatiable avarice,
and these he places before the view of the covetous man (v.
9, 17) with the intention ©f checking if possible the greedy
thirst of gain. He shows him, reflected in the clear glass of
truth, the quiet happy life of the contented man as contrasted
with his own, and which Cato with liis usual terseness thus
recommends :

*' Commoda naturae niiilo tibi tempore deerunt
Si contentus eo fueris quod postiilat usus."

This suggests to him the precarious tenure on which all
earthly possessions are held ; and shows him that should he by
any accident be deprived of them without allowing himself to
enjoy them, the reflection would render him far more unhappy
than he would hav« been had riches never fallen- to his lot.
He concludes (v. 17) with the rational advice, to enjoy with
moderation the gifts of Providence, instead of striving inces*-
santly after more. So Cato ;

214 PhUoMophy of Eodmattei. [ivhi

Quid tibi divitiae prosuDtyBi pauper abundas !**

The vision of avarice coojured up before the poet's meotal
eye has taken too powerful a bold on bis imaginatioo to be at
obce dispelled ; the ghastly form still floats before him. As be
proceeds, (chap, vi.) in describing the horrors that occupy his
soul, he exclaims : (v. 3) ^^ If a man have a hundred children^
and live inany years, and lead a prosperous life, but do not en-
joy his good things, or receive funeral rites, I declare, that a
premature birth is happier than he." And be ends (v. 12)
with setting forth the folly of the miser, in allowing himself no
enjoyment in this life, which he permits to pass from him like
a shadow, without knowing what the future is to bring forth.
And here (chap, vii.) the poet pauses awhile to lay down a
number of additional maxims, the fruit of his preceding in-
vestigations. From the censure of folly he naturally passes to
the praise of wisdom, by which he b led back (v. 13) to his
main argument, that man cannot penetrate the designs of God.
From this he deduces (v. 16) the general principle of a medi-
um in all things, which he seeks to impress on the minds of his
fellow-men as their safest guide through the intricate paths of
life ; for he savs (v. 23), '^ All this have I tried by wisdom :
I said, I shall oecome wise ; but it remained far from me."
And again (v. 25), I applied with heart and soul to the ac-
quisition of knowledge and wisdom ; but I found at last that the
miits of this anxious desire to investigate every thing were
bitterer than death ; and that lie alone who trusts steadfastly in
God, and to whom God is gracious, can escape with safety from
the labryinth m which such an undertaking must involve bitn.
This new result of his researches serves to give addltiooal
strength to his previous warnings against the restless search
after forbidden knowledge ; for in consequence of the barriers
that in every direction oppose the progress of human inquiry^
the man who is not content with that portion of knowledge
which it is permitted him to obtain, must either be con-
demned to perpetual grief for the frustration of his desires ; or
else, by breaking through the bounds preseribed to humsDitX)
he will become an outcast from hb species>and in consequence
be plunged into the very lowest depths of despair. Yet bsv
the woids of Lucretius :

^Ut genus humanum frustra plerumque probavtt
Volvere curarum tristes in pectora fluctua."

1838.] Phihtophy of EceUriastes. 915

The design thus exhibited by the sacred writer, to warn
mankind against every species of ill-regulated desire by pointing
out its evil consequences, appears also to lie as the principal
idea at the bottom of the masterpiece of Gothe, we mean his
Faust. There exists, however, a marked difference between
the two works even in this respect : Our author directly warns
against the error, and in the most earnest and forcible language
predicts its dire results ; while Gothe shadows it forth dramati-
cally in the fate of a single individual, and shows by this means
that the possessor of the rarest talents by breaking through the
laws of his nature will come to. be at variance with the world
around him, and thus convert it into a hell as regards himself
even while he lives.

The Preacher, having completed his inquiries into the obli-
gations of man to himself, now enters (chap, viii.] upon those
which he is under to his fellow-men ; and first ne takes into
consideration the king, as the highest individual in human so-
ciety, and prescribes rules for the conduct to be observed to«
wards him. He begins by recommending to subjects in gene-
ral, as their first and highest duty, an unshaken fidelity to their
sovereign (v. 3), and then speaks of the punishments which
await evil rulers. In this chapter the poet leaves the skeptical
mode of arguing with which he set out, and merely proposes
questions to himself in order to show the manner in which he
arrives at his doctrines ; having done this, he proceeds to lay
them down in the manner of a teacher. As already observedi
he first recommends the observance of steadfast obedience to
the king, even should his reigil be tyrannk»l : the reason Uxt
which is, that tyranny cannot be of long duration, and punish-
ment must overtake it in the end. He conducts his readers
(v. 10) in imagination to the tyrants' tombs, and exhibits them
as consigned to an eternal oblivion, which in the East is con-
sidered to be the most severe of all inflictions ; and then (v. IS)
breaks out into the ioyous exclamation, '^ Though the sinner
do evil an hundred times, and carry it on long, sure am I that
in the end it will be well with those who fear God.'' Yet to
this pleasing conviction is immediately opposed (y. 14) the
sad experience wfakfa seems to contradict it, that it as frequent-
Iv goes well with the wicked, and ill with the good. This
threatens to draw him once more into the vortex of materialism;
but, says the poet (y. 16), as I endeavored with the greatest
anxiety to find out the reason of all this, I became convinced

S16 Philosophy of Ecderiastes, [Jcn.T

«

that it is not in the pow^er of man thorongbly to explcxe the
works of God. And thus this reflection again occurs to him as
an angel of deliverance, leading him in safety from the dark
labyrinth into which he had wandered.

A similar mstance in one of the Psalms^ where the writer
by reflecting on the prosperity of the wicked would have been
in danger of wavering in his belief, had it not been for his finn
reliance on Providence, is too excellent and too appropriate to
be omitted.

PSALM LXZIII.

Surely God is good to Israel,

To those that are pure of heart.
But as for me, I had nearly fallen firom my ftet i

Within a little my steps had slipped :
When I envied the foolish,

And regarded the prosperity of the wicked.
For death has no bands for them.

And their health remaiDS firm ;
They are free fh>m human troubles,

And are not afflicted like other men ;
Pride stiffetis their necks,

Violence oovers them like a garment ;
Their eyes stand out with iamess,

They surpass the desires of their hearts $
They speak in mockery of wrong and oppreflskrtif

Loftily they speak ;
"They assail the heavens with their mouthsi

And their tongues go through the earth.
•So that their people reach thus ftr.

And water in abundance is poured out to them.
But they say. How shall God know ?

Is it regarded by the Most High ?
Behold, these are the wicked,

And in continual security they amass wealth.
Have I then purified my heart in vain,

And washed my bauds in innocenoe ?
In vain been afflicted ail the day.

And chastened in the morning ?
If I said, I will speak thus,

I should deal falsely with the generation of thy chiidren.
I strove to understand this^

But to me it seemed hard ;
Until I entered into the sanctuary of God,

And discovered what was their end.

1838.] PhilMophy of EccleHasie$. 817

On what slippery places hast thou set them !

Thou hast cast them down to ruin.
How have they become desolate in a moment !

They are swept away with sudden destruction.
Like a dream when one awakes,

Thou Lord shall publicly despise their image.
When my heart is vexed.

And my reins are pierced ;
Then am I stupid and ignorant,

And like a beast in thy sight :
Yet am I ever with thee ;

Thou boldest me by my right hand.
If thou lead me in thy counsel,

And conduct me to glory ;
Whom else have I in heaven,

And what besides thee can I desire on earth ?
Though my heart and my flesh fail.

The stay of my heart and my portion is God forever.
For behold they who are far from thee shall perish :

Thou destroyest all those who go astray from thee.
But as for me, the presence of Grod is my delight ;
In the Lord Jehovah I confide, and recount all thy works.

Being thus led anew to the conviction that it is impossible
for man to estimate the actions of God, the poet exerts all his

E^wer of reason to vindicate the conduct of the Most High.
e asserts that all is under the contkx)! of 6od^ that each indi-
▼idual thing is to be regarded as a portion of the whole to
which it belongs ; and that nothing exists for itself alone, or
can rise independently above the rest of creation. Every thing,
therefore, to be judged of correctly, must be viewed in all the
relations which it bears to other existences ; but as this is fre-
quently altogether beyond the power of man, he should ever
guard against suffering himself to be misled by those isolated
facts which are above his comprehension, bearing in mind the
warning of Homer :

IL vi.

This is the language which every one should address to him-
telf, to prevent his being led into error and consequent unhap-
piness by the contradictions and obscurities to be met with in
nature. But, says the poet (v. 3), the greatest evil under the
sun is, that one and the same fate happens to all : this is an
evil which leads men to the commission of crime ; for it causes

Vol. XII. No. 31. 28

216 PhUoicphy of EccUsiastes. [Jvhr

them, as our author expresses it, to entertain the idea that the
condition of a living dog is preferable to that of a dead lion,
since, with death, every thing is at an end. From this doctrine
it follows that physical enjoyment is to be pursued as the great-
est good ; for, says the deluded one, if even during life there is
no distinction made between the good and the bad, how much
less is it to be expected after death ! The poet expresses his
pity for mankind in this respect (v. 12), and leaves the reader
to his own reflections.

By this mode of viewing it, the apparent inconsistendes of
the chapter under consideration are removed, and the preacher
appears in the light of a noble moralist free from all reproach.
In this chapter also he takes occasion to show that to his reasan
he owes his deliverance from the labyrinth into which his restless
endeavors to penetrate all the secrets of nature had plunged
him. For it is reason alone in its highest state of development
that can form an estimate of its own powers, and in conse-
quence he is content with comprehending only so much as it is
possible for it to know, without attempting what is entirely
beyond its reach, and in this manner working its own destruc-
tion. The poet illustrates the value of this practical wisdom
by an example (v. 14), from which he draws the conclusion
that knowledge is to be prized above physical force. In
chap. X. he lays down those maxims which this conviction
of the preexcellence of wisdom suggests. He had already
(c. 8. V. 2.) recommended obedience to the powers that be :
he now describes the blessing which a good ruler and the curse
which an evil one may prove to a State ; concluding (v. 20)
with the advice not to conspire against the latter however
secretly, as it is impossible to tell how soon it may come to his
knowledge.

Having now completed his researches into the obligations
of man to himself, to his fellow-man, and to God; and having
stated the results in the shape of maxims for the conduct of
life ; the Preacher proceeds in chap, xi., in the form of a
peroration, to draw his subject to a close. He reverts once
more to the duties which man owes to himself, and instructs
him in what manner to make use of his possessions and to en-
joy life. He advises him not to strive incessantly after riches,
or selflshly to appropriate bis acquisitions to his own exclusive
use ; neither should be pass his days in apathetic indolence,
but with cheerfulness and moderation enjoy the blooming peri-

1 838.] State of the Presbf/ttrim Owrch. 31 9

od of youth. He then pronounces in chap. xii. the noble pre-
cept which crowns the entire production, and brings his selfHm-
posed task to an end : ^^ Remember thy Creator even in thy
youth ; before the unhappy days arrive, or the years approach,
when thou shalt say, I have no pleasure in them."

The work closes with a description of the latter end of man,
in which is depicted, in faithful colors and with a master hand,
the gradual approach of old age and finally of death. On reach-
ing the grave, ne suggests (v. 7) the consoling thought of an
after life to be spent in the presence of the Deity.

** Then shall the dust of the body return to the earth which it spraog
from:
The spirit itself shall ascend, to dwell with its Giver on high."

Such is the object and such are the contents of that precious
fragment of sacred oriental philosophy, the book of Ecclesiastes,
through the whole of which is shadowed forth the sentiment
contained in the concluding words, ^< Fear God, and keep his
commandments."

ARTICLE IX.

State of the Presbyterian Church.

Preshyteriamsm. A Reniew of the Leading Measures of the Gen-
eral Assembly of 1837. ny a Member of the New York Bar.
New York : John S. Taylor, 1888. pp. 47.

By the Editor.

The publication of this unpretending pamphlet stands con-
nected with events of painful interest and of high and moment-
ous bearing. It clums the attention of the friends of religion
and of religious liberty on several accounts. It is not the pro-
duction of a heated partizan, whose own acts and positions
before the public imposed upon him the necessity of a public
defence. The author had nothing at stake in the controversy
of which he treats. He is neither a minister nor an elder, but
an intelligent lawyer, of good reputation^ and a private mem-

890 State of the Presbtfterian Chmrch. [Jui.t

ber 6f the church. His mindy therelbrey may be supposed to
have been unbiassed by any personal or private interest in the
questions at issue ; and this, we think, is apparent from the
candor and fairness which marks his discussion. He sketches
with accuracy and clearness the origin and organization of the
Presbyterian church and the prominent events in its history,
which have led on to the existing controversy, and examines
the great principles involved in it, with the freedom and di-
rectness ot one whose only aim is to illustrate the true interests
of both parties and the rights and duties of each. This be has
accomplished with singular ability and m a manner to interest
and instruct the candid reader.

It is not, however, principally, the candor and talent ex-
hibited in this production, which have given it the importanoe
we attach to it at the present time. Had it been issued a few
months earlier, or a few days later, than the date of its actual
publication,'*^ it might have failed to accomplish the important
and striking results which it seems already to have produced.
It appeared at the very moment when a lucid and attractive
discussion of the principal points embraced in it was especially
needed to harmonize the views and concentrate the action of
that portion of the church, w&o considered themselves as op-
pressed and injured by what they regarded the unconstitutknMd
acts of the General Assembly of 1837. Had this been the
result of contrivance, or of suggestion, by the leading men of
that portion of the church who have availed themselves of the
principles maintained in this publication, we should have re-
garded it with less admiration. But, assured as we are, that,
while others, personally interested in the controversy, of both
parties, were urging their conflicting views before the public,
our author, unadvised by either, was pursuing his investigations,
and while they were yet speaking, was unconsciously answer-
ing and refuting the positions of some, and confirming those of
others, we are constrained to contemplate it as an agency es-
pecially excited and controlled by Him who seeth not as man
seeth. It is this strikingly seasonable appearance of the publi-
cation before us, and its peculiar adaptation to meet and afiect
the crisis which was approaching, that has induced us to select
it from the numerous documents, essays and opinions which
have a bearing upon the existing controversies in the Presby-

• About the 25th of April, 1838.

1888.] State of the Presbyterimi Church. 981

terian church, and to place the tide of it at the head of this
article. Whatever may be its merits ia other respects, it seems
to have been the pivot on which the action of the church, in
the constitution of its late General Assembly, has turned. It
laid down in a condensed and popular form the most important
of the constitutional and equitable principles, on which a large
portion of the church have already taken their position and
asserted their rights.

The result of the position here referred to was the organiza-
tion, in Philadelphia, on the eighteenth of May last, of two
bodies, each claiming to be ^^ The Oenercd Assembly of the
Presbyterian church in the United States of America" The
majority of the members of each body will doubtless be sus**
tained in their measures by the Presbyteries whose commissions
they bore. Which of them will be sustained in law, remains
to be decided by the civil tribunals, to which the parties have
made their appeal, as we trust, in the fear of Him by whom
princes reign and judges decree justice. But whatever may be
ultimately decided to be the legal rights of the parties, the
church is in fact divided.

This result we had for some months anticipated, with un-
feigned reluctance and regret. We deprecated it as an evil
and a reproach to be prevented, if possible. It was at length,
however, rendered unavoidable, excepting by the surrender of
rights and privileges, by a large portion of the church, which it
seemed plainly their duty to maintain. We now contemplate
it as one of those mysterious events in the Providence of God,
by which he often confounds the wisdom of the wise, and
makes his power and goodness known by means the most im-
probable to human appearance.

To us, the very reverse of the present position of the Pres-
byterian church would have seemed to be the attitude in which
she ought to have stood forth, to exert the most benign and
efficient influence on the advancement of the cause of Christ
among men. Her constituent members and her ministry, from
the commencement of her history in this country, have been
among the most eiilightened of our citizens. As a body they
have been the friends of education, the. warin and zealous
patrons, not only of common schools, but of the higher semina-
ries of learning both classical and professional. Through their
efficiency, with the blessing of God, the church has grown with
the growth of the country, both in character and numbers.

SiSS State of the Presbtfterim Church. [Juu

until she faas extended, with more or less effect, the
the elevating and saving influence of her ministrations over
many millions of our population. Among the several denom-
inations of American Chnstians, there was none which seemed
to possess so many and so great facilities of usefulness. The
total number of her communicants, as reported in the Minutes
of the General Assembly of 1837, was 220,557, and the num-
ber of her ministers and licentiates, 2,420 ; and there probably
does not exist on the face of the earth a denomination of Chris-
tians equally numerous and extended, among whom there pre-
vails a greater uniformity of doctrinal belief. The differences
which exist in this respect, excepting a few individual instances,
are all of minor importance, and such as had ever been regard-
ed, in this and in other denominations, as quite consistent with
the preservation of the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.
Differences equally great, and in some cases the same, have
prevailed in the Presbyterian church from her beginning, and
have been tolerated through the whole progress of her history,
excepting the period of her lamented division, from 1741 to
1758, at the close of which, by mutual concessions, the two
Synods were happily united," though <' there is not the least
reason to believe that the members of either party really enters
tained essentially different opinions, on any important points,
when they e£^ted a union in 1758, from those which they
entertained at the date of their schism in 1741."'*^ There was,
therefore, no sufficient reason for the existing division of the
church, on the ground of differences of doctrinal belief, and no
sufficient reason now exists, on this account, for the continuance
of this division.

Eighteen months ago this noble and delightful communion
was onE. She had arisen from small beginnings in the infancy
of the country, and had held on her way, with occasional inter-
ruptions, and through many trials for a century and a half.
Many of her litde ones, which had risen up in rapid succession,
in the new setdements, had become thousands. The sphere of
her direct ministrations, mingled with those of other denomina-
tions, had been extended over four fifths of the nation, and
many of her mmisters and members were foremost among Ajner-
ican Christians, in their individual and associated efforts to pro-
mote those great objects of catholic christian benevolence, which
have been prosecuted, with manifold blessings on our country

* See Miller's Letters to Presbyterians, p. 11.

1838.] SiaU of the Pmbyterim Church. 988

and the world, by the American Bible, Tract, Sunday School,
fklucation, Home and Foreign Missionary and other benevo-
lent societies.

While she was thus watering others, and associating her in-
fluences with those of Christians of all other names, in the pro-
motion of knowledge and religion, her own numbers were great-
ly multiplied by the outpouring of the Spirit of God upon many
of her congregations. Her character and influence, with the
exception of those internal conflicts which had begun to dis-
turb and pervert the action of some of her judicatories, were
admired and emulated by other denominations. Had she pre-
served her integrity and continued to cherish and exhibit the
evangelical and catholic spirit, which had marked her proceed-
ings in former years, she might have maintained in perpetuity,
an influence for good on the cause of universal philanthropy,
unequalled by that of any other single denomination of Chris-
tians. This was percerved and acknowledged by her most in-
telligent friends ; and a great majority of h^r members, no doubt,
on both sides of the existing division, deeply felt both the im-
portance and the responsibility of preserving the unity of the
church entire and unbroken. But the accuser of the brethren
had entered her judicatories. Whisperings and surmises against
prominent individuals were spread among her members. News-
papers, which had been established for the purpose of circu-
lating religious intelligence among the people, became the vehi-
cles of attack upon personal character. Excitement and alarm
were thus produced, and prosecutions for alleged heresy fol-
lowed in their train ; parties were formed, and the higher and
lower judicatories were, in several instances, arrayed against
each other.

In this state of things the prevailing plans of promoting re-
ligious benevolence by Voluntary Societies were supposed to be
favorable to the increase and prosperity of one of the parties.
These, therefore, were assailed by the other party, as danger-
ous and inexpedient, and organizations were suggested and
adopted by several judicatories, to counteract the influence of
Voluntary Societies, and to prosecute the various objects of
christian benevolence in a manner better suited to promote the
interests and increase of the party adopting these organizations.
One of these, '^ the Board of Missions of the General Assem-
bly,'' was at length, in 1828, allowed the sanction o[ the high-
est judicatory of the church. Subsequently a similar organiza-

224 St4ae of ike Presbyterian Church. [Jult

tion was adopted in regard to the educatioD of candidates for
the ministry. These gave ubiquity to a controversy which had
been commenced on other grounds, and had hitherto been con-
fined to certain sections of the church. The friends of Vol*
untary. Catholic Societies, on the one hand, and of Ecclesiastical^
Sectarian Boards, on the other, were now, everywhere, urged
to take their sides. Discussion on these topics became rife in
the newspapers and periodicals. The results of these public
appeals, and of the agencies employed, were every year report-
ed to the General Assembly, and were there the occasions of
arraying the parties against each other, till, at length, that judi-
catory, which had already consented to adopt sectarian organi-
zations for Domestic Missions and Eklucation, was strenuously
urged m 1835 and 1836, to adopt another for Foreign Missions.
It now became apparent also that the leading friends of this
measure desired and designed, as soon as practicable, to super-
cede the action of all Voluntary Societies in the Presbyterian
church by the organization of sectarian Boards for the prosecu-
tion of every object of christian benevolence. These effints,
though unavailing in the Assemblies of those years, were not
without their effect in giving new vigor to the controversy which
had already been waged in every section of the church. Yet,
as we have said, The church was one. Her form, though mar-
red, was not broken. Her representatives in the General As*
sembly of 1837 n^^t as the judicatory of a united body. But
they brought with them the elements of disruption. Measures
had been previously concerted in a confidential '^ Convention"
of one of the parties, and were carried in the Assembly, which,
whatever may have been their design, have resulted in a formal
division of the church, and have brought into question, before
the civil tribunals of the country, the rights of two bodies, each
representing, as far as yet appears, about equal portions of what
was '^ the Presbyterian church in the United States," and each
claiming to be the General Assembly of the same.

We will now state the grounds on which this division has
been effected, or rather, on which that body, which, for the sake
of distinction, is now currently denominated the '' Constitutional
General Assembly," has been organized. This we will do
principally by quotations from the pamphlet before us, which,
though they may fail to do justice to the sti-ength of our author's
continuous argument in support of the principles he advances,
will place before the reader the principal points on which the

1838.] State of the Presbyterian Church. 225

action of the Assembly turned. We cannot deny ourselves the
pleasure, however, of first presenting the rapid sketch, by our
author, of the history and progress of the Presbyterian church
from its beginning, to the meeting of the General Assembly
of 1837.—

'^ Presbyterians were among the first of those who sought, in our
country, entire religious freedom. The organization of the Church,
in its present form, however, is only coeval with the constitution of
the United States. In 1788, there were but one Synod and seven-
teen Presbyteries in the country. The highest assembly in ihe
Church, was the Synod of New- York and Philadelphia. This was
80 large, that it was decided to divide it into four Synods, and to
form a new judicatory, to be composed of delegates from all the
Presbyteries in the United States. This was done in that year, and
thus a purely representative body — the highest Council, and the
Court of last resort, — was created", and called. The General Assem-
bly of the Presbyterian Church. The powers and duties of all the
courts and councils, were at this time prescribed and defined in a
written constitution, which, by alterations and amendments, haa
become the present constitution.

" Every body knows how the spirit of our free institutions was the
breath of a new life to our country, and how, afler the adoption of
the federal constitution in 1788, the nation spread onward into the
wilderness. So, too, our Churcb, organized in the republican sim-
plicity and equality of the New Testament, and recognizipg and
adopting the immutable principles of human rights, grew with the
country, and spread onward and around, as the receding forests
opened new regions to be christianized. As the Church grew, its
Courts and Councils were multiplied. The growth was in the
churches, by the mere addition of individual members. The multi-
plication of the judicatories, was by the totally different, but simple
process of sub-division. Members were received into the churches
, by the sessions, and in this manner alone the Church grew. As the
members increased, and emigrants settled in neighborhoods, separate
churches were formed, and new pastors settled. The Presbyteries
were thus enlarged, and parts were organized into new Presbyteries.
The Synods, too, became inconveniently large, and parts were
formed into separate Synods. Thus, not by tha introduction of new
elements, but by a continued division of the genuine old Presbyterian
judicatories, the little assembly that met m apostolic harmony in
1789, grew into the great and discordant politico-religious multitude
of 1837.

" While the Church was thus spreading over our vast territory^ the

Vol. XII. No. 31. 29

226 State of the Presbjfierim CkurA. [ixxvi

a

State of Connecticut was the hive, from which swanns of emigrants
went to the fertile regions of the frontier. Our herders were prind-
polly occupied by Congregationalists, in connexion with the Greneial
AjBsociation of Connecticut^ and by Presbyterians, in connection with
the Greneral Assembly. As for their common interest, they banded
together against the savage and the wild beast, and joined hands in
throwing up their dwellines and fortresses, without disputing about
the fashion of either ; so, lor their common faith and worship, they
were willing to make common cause in building up churches, aM
securing and sustaining the protecting institutions of religion, without
regard to the minor points of church government. Each yielded a
little, that both might enjoy together, what neither could enjoy alone,
the stated ministration of the gospel To remove ail objections,
however, which might arise in any minds, to this noble, evangeliziiig
spirit of charity, the highest Ecclesiastical Councils of the two sects,
corresponded on the subject, and in 1801, only eleven years after
the formation of the constitution, united in recommending a plan, by
which the Congregationalist from Connecticut, and the rresb3rtenan
in the new settlements, might unite in supporting the gospel. lis
object was to prevent alienation, and to promote union and harmony.
It enjoined on all the missionaries of both parties, the promotion of
mutual forbearance and accommodation between the two sects. It
recommended, in case of ministerand people belonging to difierent
sects, that all should maintain their respective forms of flovemmeDt
and discipline, and preserve their ecclesiastical connection, settling
their difficulties, between minister and people, by a sort of arbitra-
tion, or council, composed of half of each sect, unless all could agree
to submit to the forms of the sect to which the minister should be-
long. In case of a mixture of Pre8b3rterians and Con^gaticmalists,
in £e same settlement, it recommended their uniting m one church,
administering discipline by a committee from the communicants,
with a right of appeal to the Presbytery or the Church, as the ac-
cused should be of one or the other sect. This was the ^^ Plan <^
Union,^' and by its operation, the churches were rapidly extended.
The stated ministrations of the Gospel, brought forth its appropriate
fruits, and the plan of union remained undisturbed till 1^7, a
period of thirty-six years, durins which time the '^ new settlements^*
of 1801, had become the populous cities— the rich and flourishing
counties and States of 1637.

^ During the last few years, various causes have operated in each
^ General Assembly, to produce discord and contention. A laroe
party, of great respectability, have been desirous of carrying certun
measures, but being in the minority, have been, of course, defeated.
They have not concealed their chagrin, and, finally, they attempted
a system of party organization. They called a Convention to
concert measures by which a majority might be secured in the

1838.] State of the Presbyterian Ckurdi. SiSn

Aasembly of 1887,* or failing in that, a secession produced. Their
avowed purpose was to carry their measures, or ^^ dissolve the
vmon^ of the Presbyterian church. The Convention met a few
da^ previous to the meeting of the Assembly of 1837, and deter-
mmed on their course. Unexpectedly, however, when the Assem-
bly met, the disunionists t found themselves in the majority. They
suddenly chanced their course — entered, without sufficient delibera-
tion upon ill-aigested measures, and immediately proceeded to
secure their conquest, by acts of nullification and exclusion—- and,
by imposing new tests, to prevent the popular voice from ever put-
ting them again in the minority.

*' It had been observed, that a lar^ part of the representatives from
the Presbyteries in Western New- York, and the Western Reserve,
had usually voted against the wishes of the disunionists, and those
regions were the " new settlements" of 1801, where the Plan of
Union was designed to operate. The leading disunionists thought
this furnished the means of gettmg rid of a troublesome minority —
and, on their suggestion, the Assembly passed resolutions, without
notice, abrogating the Plan of Union— excluding from the Church
the Synods of the Western Reserve, Utica, Geneva, and Genessee
-^binding the clerk to enrol no commissioners to the next Assembly
who should come from those regions ; and den3riDg to the repre-
sentatives from new Presb3rteries the right to sit in the Assembly,
till fidfter much of its important business be transacted, and even then,
except by permission, on submitting to new tests. These acts were
the more easily accomplished, inasmuch as the reading clerk,
(whose whole duty it is to retid correctly,) in reading the roll to take
the questions, omitted, intentionally, the names of a large number
of the unionists, who were actual, sitting members of the Assembly,
and the moderator, and the Assembly, decided it was out of order
for them to ask for the enjoyment of their privilege of voting.

■■■■■— ■■ ■^|■ II ^Wl ■■»■ ^ ■i.^^■^^ ■^■.^^ ■ -■ — ^^^M^»^^^»^»^^^M ■ ■ ■ m^^^^m^^^^

* The first Convention of this kind which was avowedly called for
the purpose of promoting party organization was that which was in-
vited from Presbyteries and minorities of Presbyteries in the celebra-
ted party paper denominated '^ The Act and Testimony," in June
1834, and which convened in Pittsburgh in 1835, a few days previous
to the meeting of the General Assembly of that year. The influence
of this Convention was found to be so efficacious, that the party were
eneouraged to call Conventions for similar purposes in 1837 and
1838.— JEJd

t The majority being changeable, the terms ^ majority" and " mi-
nority*' are extremely, inconvenient, as descriptive of the parties.
The terms Old School and New School, being also liable to objection,
as conveying no idea of the distinction between the parties, I have
preferred the terms ** disunionists" for the majority, on the leading
measures in 1837, and *^ unionists" for the other party.

228 &ate of the Presbyterian Church. [Jult

*^ Are these proceeding valid and binding on the Churches ? What
is their force and operation ?

*' It is contended by the one party, that they are valid in their whole
extent, and that by their fair construction and operation, they shot
out from the Presbyterian Church, all the Courts and Councils,
Synods, Presbyteries, Sessions and Churches— all the professing
Christians, clergy and laity — men, women, and children, within the
boundaries of the Synolds of Ulica, Geneva, Grenessee, and the
Western Reserve, amounting to about 500 ministers, and about
60,000 private Christians. The other party as confidently contends
that the proceedings are all unconstitutional and void, and that the
integrity of t})e Presbyterian Church is unimpared, and its constitu-
ency undiminished. '^

Our author proceeds to state the leading pnnciples of the
Presbyterian church government, the organization, rights and
duties of Church Sessions, Presbyteries, Synods and the Gen-
eral Assembly, and shows that " the great principles of Ameri-
can liberty are the foundation principles of religious liberty and
of Presbyterian right in our church constitution." He remarks
truly, that ^' the only 'punishments known to the church consti-
tution, are admonition, rebuke, suspension or exclusion from
church privileges till repentance, and excommunication ; — and
in case of a minister, suspension and deposition from bis office
of bishop. * The highest punishment to which their authority
extends,' says the constitution, * is to exclude the contumacious
and impenitent from the church.* Declaring one out of the
church is always a judicial sentence," etc. He then raises the
following inquiry :

" Tested by them," (these principles,) " What becomes of the
resolutions cutting off large portions of the Church ? Construe them
as we will, view them in any light, is it not true that they violate
every one of these principles, and seem to have been passed in utter
derision of all our constitutional rights and safe-guards? The
General Assembly, a mere appellate Court, — sitting in Philadelphia
— has inflicted the highest ecclesiastical penalty on 60,000 laymen
and 500 clergymen — residing in other States — many hundred 'miles
distant — without notice — without accuser — ^without accusation —
without citation — without proof or pretence of trial — without sentence
— ^without naming an individual — or specifying ftn ofllence — and with
the express admission, that an unknown, mdefinite portion of them,
were ' strictly Presbyterian in doctrine and in order,* and were
guilty of nothing."

These are the naked facts. Our author's position is tliat

r

1838.] State of the Presbyterian Church. 289

f the resolutions referred to, if they have any force, are clearly

equivalent to a sentence of excommunication, because there is

r no way, except by excommunication, in which a member can

be put out of the church, unless it be by dismission with recom-

t mendation to another church. Are these dismissed to another

i church ? What church ? Are these recommended ?

' The question then to be examined is, whether these resolu*

tioBs can have any validity as resolutions of exclusion or excom-
munication ? They are as follows.

*^ ' But as the Plan of Union adopted for the new settlements in
1801, was originally an unconstitutional act on the part of that As*
sembly, these important standing rules having never been submitted
to the Presbyteries ; and as they were totally destitute of authoritj^
as proceeding from the General Association of Connecticut, which is
invested with no power to legislate in such cases, and especially to
enact laws to regulate churches not within her limits ; and as much
confusion and irregularity have arisen from this unnatural and un-
constitutional s^tem of unicHi ; therefore it is

'' Resolved, That the act of the Assembly of 1801, entitled a Plan
of Union, etc. be, and the same is, hereby abrogated.

" Resolved, That by the operation of the abrogation of the Plan of
Union of 1801, the Synod of the Western Reserve is, and it is here-
by declared to be, no longer a part of the Presbyterian church in
the United States.

" Be it resolved, by the General Assembly of the Presbyterian
church in the United States of America :

" 1. That in consequence of the abrogation, bv this Assembly, of
the Plan of Union of 1801, between it and the General Association
of Connecticut, as utterly unconstitutional, and therefore null and
void from the beginning, &ie Synods of Utica, Geneva, and Gonessee,
which were formed and attached to this body, under and in execu-
tion of such Plan of Union, be, and they are hereby declared to be,
out of the ecclesiastical connection of the Presbyterian church in the
United States of America, and not in form or fact an integral por-
tion of said church.

" 2. That the solicitude of this Assembly on the whole subject,
and its urgency for the immediate decision of it, are greatly increased
by reason of the gross disorders which are ascertained to have pre-
vailed in those Synods, (as well as that of the Western Reserve,
against which a declarative resolution, similar to the first of these,
has been passed during, our present session ;) it being made clear to
us, that even the Plan of Union itself was never consistently car-
ried into effect by those professing to act under it

^^ 3. That the General Assembly has no intention by these reso-
lutions, (or that passed in the case of the Synod of the Western

830 iSS^o^e of the Prethfterian CSimch. [Juu

Beserve) to a&ct in uny way the ministerial standing of any mean
ber of either of said Synods ; nor to disturb the pastoral relati<MDi in
any church : nor to interfere with the duties or relations of priwte
Christians in their respective congregations ; but only to declare and
determine, according to the truth and necessity of the case, and by
virtue of the full authority existing in it for that purpose, the relation
of all said Synods^ and all their constituent parts to this body— «Dd
to the Presbyterian church in these United States.

^^ 4. That inasmuch as there are reported to be several chuicfaes
and ministers, if not one or two Presbyteries, now.in connecticMi with
one or more of said Synods, which are strictly Presbyterian in doc-
trine and order: Be it therefore further resolved, that all such
churches and ministers as wish to unite with us, are hereby directed
to apply for admission into those Presbyteries, belonging to our ood-
nection, which are most convenient to their respective locations : and
that any such Presbyteries as aforesaid, being strictly Presbyterian
in doctrine and order, and now in connection with either of said Sy-
nods, as may desire to unite with us, are hereby directed to make
application^ with a full statement of their respective cases, to the next
General Assembly, which will take proper order thereon.^ '"

^^ These resolutions, it will be seen are all made to depend upon
the unconstitutional character of the Plan of Unioa If the Plan of
Union was constitutional, the resolutions fall of course to the ground.
It is important, then, to inquire into its nature, and the consequences
of its abrogation/'

As this " Plan of Union" has come to be a document of so
much importance in American church history, and also that the
reader may appreciate the force of the remarks which follow,
we deem it proper to give it a place in this review.

THE PLAN OF UNION.
From the Assembly's Digest, p. 397.

A Plan of TJmon between Preshyteridns and CongregatianaU^^ in

the new settlementSj adopted in 1801.

*^ Regulations adopted by the General Assembly of the Presbyte-
rian church in Amenca, and by the General Association of the State
of Connecticut, (provided said Association agree to ihem) with a
view to prevent alienation, and promote union and harmony, in those
new settlements which are composed of inhabitants from these bod«
ies.

^1. It is strictly enjcuned on all their missionaries to the new set-
tlements, to endeavor, by all proper means, to promote mutual for-
bearance and accommodation between those inhabitants of ihe new
settlements who hold the Presbyterian, and those who hold ihe Con-
gragational form of church government

1838.] &ate of the Presbyterian Church. 23 1

^^2. If in the new settlements, any church of the Congregational
order shall settle a minister of the Presbyterian order, that church
may, if they choose, still conduct their discipline according tp Con-
gregational principles, settling their difficulties among themselves, or
by a council mutually agreed upon foi^that purpose : But if any
difficulty shall exist between the minister and the church, or any
member of it, it shall be referred to the presbytery to which the minis-
ter shall belong, provided both parties agree to it ; if not, to a coun-
cil consisting of an equal number of Presbyterians and Congrega-
tionalists, agreed upcm by both parties.

^'3. If a Presbyterian church shall settle a minister of Congrega*
tional principles, that church may still conduct their discipline accor-
ding to Presbyterian principles ; excepting that if a difficulty arise*
between liim and his church, or any member of it, the cause shall
be tried by the Association to which the said minister shall belonff,
provided both parties agree to it ; otherwise by a council, one hcuT
Congrecationaiists and me other half Presbyterians, mutually agreed
on by the parties.

" 4. If any congre^tion consist partly of those who hold the Con*
gregational form of discipline, and partly of those who hold the Pres-
byterian form ; we recommend to both parties that this be no obstruc-
tion to their uniting in one Church and settling a Minister ; — and
that in this case, the Church choose a standing committee from the
communicants of said Church, whose business it shall be to call to ac-
count ever^ member of the church who shall conduct himself incon-
sistently with the laws of Christianity, and to ^ve judgment on such
conduct ; and if the person condemned b3||heur judgment be a Pres-
byterian, he shall have liberty to appeal totne Presbytery ; if a Con*
gregationalist, he shall have Uberty to appeal to the body of ^e nude
communicants of the Church ; in the former case, the determination
of the Presbytery shall be final, unless the Church consent to a fur-
ther appeal to the Synod, or to the Gieneral Assembly ; and in the*
latter case, if the party condemned shall wish for a trial by a mntual
council, the cause shall be referred to such council. And provided the
said standuag committee of any church shall depute one of themselves
to attend the Presbytery, he may have the same right to sit and act
in the Presbytery, as a ruling elder of the Presbyterian Church."

Our author reviews this '' Plan of Union" at length, and
shows that it was a plan solely for the new settlements; — that it
was confined to new settlements composed of inhabitants m-
connection vnth the General Assembly and the General Asso"
elation of Connecticut. " It did not embrace Congregational-
ists from the rest of New England. Congregationalists from
Massachusetts were no more embraced in it than Quakers from
Rhode Island ;" etc. — Its object was to promote union and har-

232 State of the Presbyterian Church. [ Jult

inony between individuals of the two sects in certain circum-
stances, while it was not intended to affect the membership or
ecclesiastical connection of clergy or laity in either denomina-
tion. From all this our author concludes that neither its exist-
ence nor abrogation could afiect the integrity of the Presbyteri-
an church in the slightest degree. He adds :

^^ It was essentially a missionary plan — an evangelizing scheme,
and entirely within the power of the Assembly to recoRuneod.
(What may they not recommend ?) The Assembly of 1801 was
as competent to make it as the Ajssembly of 1837 to unmake it ;
and both were entirely competejit to do so. It was not in any sense
a contract. Neither the Assembly, nor the Association, nor the two
sects, nor any individuals or bodies of men, thereby agreed to do, or
to omit to do any act, or to exercise or to waive any right It toot
not a standing rule or a constitutional rule, to be submitted to the
Presbyteries. It is an abuse of language to call it either the one or
the other. It was no rule at alL It prescribed nothing, commanded
nothing, required nothing. It asked for no obedience, contemplated
no responsibility, inflicted no punishment It neither restraint nor
constrained any man or body of men. How idle then, on the one
hand, to contend that it could not be made by one Assembly, and on
the other, that it could not be rescinded by a succeeding Assembly !
It was clearly, in any just vieii/of the nature of the Plan itself, liable
to be abandoned or rescinded, at pleasure.

*•*• It was subject to be rescinded also for a higher reaaon. Hie
Creneral Assembly has |u> perpetuity of mind or body. Each As-
sembly is independent or another. In all matters of advice, recom-
mendation, and general action, — as a Council,— one Assembly has
no constitutional right to bind another Assembly. What one As-
sembly can do, another can undo, with the exception of judicial
decisions. One Assembly cannot reverse the judicial deci^on of
another Assembly ; but it is its clear right to decide a precisely
similar case in a directly opposite manner.

" The Assembly then haa abundant power to abrogate the Plan
of Union, and by tfieir resolution passed on the 23d May, 1837, it was
abrogated. It was thereby abrogated. It was then abrogated. It
existed till that time, and no longer. And the only consequence that
could follow from rescinding the Plan would be, that from that day,
there would be no longer any Plan of Union between Presbyterians
and Congregationalists in the new settlements, in the support of the
Gospel. Each sect must stand alone, a4[id bear its own burdens.
Whether its operation brought any one into the church or not, its
abrogation could turn no one out of the Church : members are not
thus turned out of the Church. Then its abrogation would draw afler
it no such consequences as the disunionists supposed, and by their

1838.] State of the Presbyterim Church. 883

resdlutioDS of ezcluaion declared. It could by nopossibility have a
retrokictive effect, or an expulsive effect^'*

The declaration of the resolutions in question, therefore, was
absurd. They declare certain Synods to be " no longer a
part," " an integral portion" of the Presbyterian church ! A
Synod is not a part of the church, but a local court, created by
the church, for the convenience and protection of a portion of
its members. The church is composed of its members, and
not of its courts.

" If, by any means,'' says our author, " there should be neither
Assembly, nor Synod, nor Presbytery in the whole Church, still the
Church would be as perfect and complete, and as larce as ever —
none of its parts would be gcme, and it would be entirely competent
to create and organize anew all its judicatories. Here lies the great
fallacy of these resolutions : they seem to consider a Synod, and
those individuals who sit in it, and all those who live withm the cir*
cuit of its jurisdiction, as the same idea. It can have been nothing
but this confusion of ideas, and the sweeping, uncertain, and indis-
tinct character of these resolutions, that blbded the eyes of many
who voted for them.''

Again. No man can be affected by such resolutions' as
these, unless he can be identified. The resolutions, therefore,
are clearly void for uncertainty, in regard to individuals. Nor
can the disowning of Synods by the General Assembly, in any
manner affect the existence and integrity of Presbyteries, be-
cause the Presbyteries and they only are represented in the
Assembly. These and several other points of importance to
his argument, our author urges with great force and directness,
in most of which we doubt not his correctness, though, in
regard to some of them, we have been accustomed to entertain
different views. In the general conclusion to which he arrives,
however, we entirely concur, viz : " That in every view of
the case, the constituency of the Oeneral Assembly remains the
samcy as in former years, and that great judicatory of the
church is itself untouched and unimpaired by these resolutions^*
Notwithstanding the unconstitutional acts of the General

* In the foregoing popitioim oar author is fully sustained by the
legal opinions of G. Wood, Esq. and Chancellor Kent of New York,
excepting thai the latter was inclined to treat the ^ Plan of Union'' as
a contract between the Geo. Assembly and the Gen. Association. — Ed^

Vol. XII. No. 31. 30

5t34 Skate of the Presbyterian OiurA. [Jiii.t

Assembly of 1837, all the Presbyteries were as competent to
form, by their commissioners, the General Assembly of 1838,
as they bad ever been to form any previous Assembly.

^^ What, then," says our author, ^^ will constitute the Greneral
Assembly of 1838 ? It must be chosen in the same manner as die
last, that is, it must be chosen by all the Presbyteries, which choose
to be represented. '' The General Assembly shall repiesent in one
body ali the particular churches of this denomination.'^ " It shall be
denominated the General Assembly/' ^ The Greneral Assembly tkmH
consist of an equal delegation <» bishops and elders from eadk
Presbytery" The delegates or commissioners are appointed by
all the Presbyteries '^ to consult, vote and determine, <m aU tkmgs
that may come before that body.'* They are all equal in power
and right— -all are appointed in the same manner, and brizLg the
same evidence of it If any have superiority, whence do they
derive it ? etc. It is not necessary that they should all be present,
but none must be excluded who bring the proper evidence of their
appointment'' * * * * If some are excluded, it is not a judicatory
of the whole Church — it does not ^^ represent in one body all tiie
particular Churches" — it is not ^ the bond of upion, peace, corres-
pondence and mutual confidence among all our Churches" — ^it has
no ri^ht to " superintend the concerns of the whole Church" — it is
not the " General Assembly," etc.

Any fourteen or more of these commissioners, one half of whom

shall be ministers, being met, on the day and at the place appointed,

shall be a quorum for the transaction of business." Any nnmber,

*^ being met," are necessaiy to form a quorum. Fourteen are not a

quorum, if there be more there. No business can be transacted

unless there be a quorum. It is not the General Assembly till there

is a <}uorum competent to transact business ; and there caimot coo*

stitutionally be a quorum for the transaction of business, if anv of

*^ fourteen or more, being met," are excluded or debarred mm

thoir participation in the transaction of business. On any other

construction, there might be a dozen quorums of the General

Assembly competent to transact business, which is absurd. These

principles are so universally received and acted on in all the

transactions of public afiairs, that it is believed that the whole historr

of deliberative bodies, no matter with what factious zeal or unprinci*

pled party-spirit they may have beenclmracterized, does not uiraish

an instance, in which it was ever before pretended, that a part of a

body of directors, trustees, managers, representatives, of any sort

could exclude their associates, ana legally exercise the authority of

the whole, except such were the express terms of their association."

These are the principles which are maintained in the Essay
before us. Tb^y were brought before the public in sereral

1838.] State of the Fresbytwim Gi^urek. 935

newspapers, and in the pamphlet under review, a few weeks
before the meeting of the General Assembly in May last. They
were not new. Most of them had been urged in otlier essays,
speeches and publications, but they were here combined and
clearly stated, and supported by an array of arguments which
left no longer any ground of doubt or hesitation as to their sub-
stantial correctness. They were accordingly adopted and
acted on with great unammitv, by almost the entire number
of the commissioners to the General Assembly of 1838, who
wer6 opposed to the exscinding acts of the AssemUy of 1837.

As was expected, the clerks of the former Assembly, in
obedience to the order of that Assembly, and in fulfilment of
their pledge or promise to the same, made out a partial roll of
the Assembly of 1838, declining to receive the commissions and
to record the names of the commissioners from all the Pres-
byteries within the bounds of the disowned Synods. The names
of the said commissioners were then tendered to the Moderator,
and a motion made and duly seconded that that roil be com-
pleted by their insertion. The Moderator declared the motion
out of order. The member proposing it appealed to the Assem-
bly from this decision. The Moderator declared this also out
of order, and refiised to put the appeal. . This was regarded as
a palpable refusal of the Moderator to discharge the duties of
his office, and, as, by virtue of bis having been the Moderator
of the last preceding Assembly, be was by constitution declared
to be the Moderator of the present Assembly only ^^ until
another should be appointed in his place," a commissioner pre-
sent, whose name was already enrolled, nominated another com-
missioner to be now appointed Moderator of this Assembly*
This nomination being duly seconded, was put to vote by the
individual who made the nomination, and carried in the affirma-
tive by a large majority, very few being heard to vote in the
negative ; whereupon the Commissioner named was declared to
be duly elected Moderator of the General Assembly for the
time being. The Clerks, who had refused to receive and re*
cord the names of certain commissioners, were then supersed-
ed by the appointment of others in their place, — ^the roll was
completed by adding the names of all the commissioners present,
which bad been omitted, and the General Assembly was organ*
ized, as is claimed, in all respects, according to the Constitution.

In the mean time, that portion of the Commissioners present,
who approved of the exscmding resolutions of the General As-

236 State of the Prtshyterum Church. [Jui.r

sembly of 1837, refused to act with the AssemUy consoituted
as above, and proceeded to constitute what they also claim to
be the General Assembly. - Their proceedings, in the matter of
organization, as far as we know, with the exception of their
having excluded from their seats the commissioners above refer-
red to, were according to the constitution and usages of the
church. Thus have been constituted two bodies each claiming
to be The General Assembly of the Presbyterian diurch in the
United States. Each of these bodies proceeded to perform ac-
cording to their best discretion, all the acts and duties required
to be done by the highest judicatory of the church. These acts
conflicting, as they do, with each other, and in some cases in-
volving the rights of property, as well as constitutional privi-
leges and duties, have imposed upon the adherents of both
bodies the necessity of an appeal to the civil tribunals of the
country to determine which of the two is in law, and in fact,
the Constitutional General Assembly. Prosecutions, we under-
stand, have already been commenced for the settlement of the
great question at issue.

We hardly need to remark, that this is a state of things deeply
to be deplored, not only by Presbyterians, but by Christians
generally. The collisions which have resulted in this separa-
tion, have brought great reproach upon the cause of religion ;
and the result itself is reproach&l. It is but little relief to our
own feelings to say that separation is better than for the parties
to have remained in one body, to contend with each other be-
fore a gazing world, as they have done for several years pasL
To make the best of it, the alternative is but the substitution of
one evil for another ; and upon the authors of the former, of
whatever party, whose acts and doings have created a necessity
for the latter, there rests a tremendous responsibility.

These two divbions of the once united Presbyterian church,
will hereafter constitute two denominations of Presbyterians.
One of the Assemblies recently in session, will in due time, be
determined to be the legal successor of the General Assembly
of 1837. That one and each future Assembly which shall be
formed in pursuance of the position which it has assumed, by
commissioners from all the Presbyteries which choose to be thus
represented, will, of right, retain the name and authority of the
^' General Assembly of the Presbyterian church in the United
States J' The other Assembly, with its successors, will inherit

i less.] Skate of the Presbyterian Church. S37

DO rights from its predecessors, but will acquire new rights by
the action of such Presbyteries as shall choose to constitute such
Assemblies, either under the provisions of the present *' Form
of Government," or any other which they shall adopt. Which
of the two bodies shall be reduced to this alternative, we need
not be especially solicitous. It will be the duty of the parties,
as citizens, no less than as Christians, to respect the decisions of
the tribunals to which they are amenable. Both parties should
remember that the success of either in establishing its claim, before
a civil court, to the rights and privileges of the General Assem-
bly, under the present constitution, is but a minor interest, not
worthy to be compared with the greater duties and responsi-
bilities which devolve upon both these divisions of the church,
in the positions which they have respectively taken ; and worse
even, than division, will be the result, if the strength of these
bodies shall be frittered away and lost in contending for their
claimed inheritance. While the question on this subject b
pending, let not the parties delay their work as Christians, as
ministers, and as members of the church universal. A name to
live, though it be supported by the best evidences of orthodoxy,
or sustained by the laws of the land, will not constitute success
in this conflict. There can be no desirable triumph to either
party, excepting that which shall be celebrated in the songs of
the redeemed rescued from perdition and restored to the favor
of God through its mstrumentality. ^^ And here," in the lan-
guage of the late Dr. Rice of Virginia, '' is the fairest oppor-
tunity for that party which has the best spirit, and the most of
truth on their side, to gain the victory. For, my life on it, in
this age, those who do most to build up the kingdom of the
Redeemer, will prevail."

838 Critical NoOm. [July

ARTICLE X.

Critical Notices.

1.— JZeseorcAes inio the Physical History of Mankind. By Jama
Cowies Prickard, M. D. JP. JR. S. tL R. I. A.^ Carrespemd-
ing Member of the National Institute of France^ Honorary
Fellow of King's and Queen's CoUege of Physicians in Ire-
land, member of the Royal Academy (f Medicine of Paris,
Third Edition. London, 1836—7. Vols. L and IL pp. 976,
S73.

Dr. Prichard, the author of the volumes befixe us, has alrea«hr
made himself favorably known to the literary and scientific woild.
Besides the former editions of the present woik, he has puUidied a
Treatise on Insanity, said to be the best work on roentu deian^
ment in the English language ; a Review of the Doctrine of a Tual
Principle; and a learned Analysis of the Egyptian Mythology.
The diversities of structure in the human family early en^iged ha
attention, and in 1806 he selected this subject for the argument of a
Latin inaugural essay, printed at that time. The same tfeatise was
translated and enlaiq^d in 1813, and under this new form it made
the first edition of £0 present work. After further and laborioos
investigation he brought out a second edition in 1826, to which in
1831 he added an able philological essay on the eastern origin of
the Celtic nations, provea by a comparison of their dialects wiih the
Sanscrit, Greek, Latin, and Teutomc nations. He now presents to
the public a third edition. In the words of the author ^ each edition
has been almost entirely written anew : every topic comprised in it
has been reconsidered, with the advantage of such additxmal infor-
mation as I have been in the intenral enabled to acquire.^

The Physical History, or Physiognomical £thiK>graphy of the
human race is a department of knowledge of the most recent date-^
indeed it owes its origin to an author now living, Professor Blu-
menbach of Grottingen. Dr. Prichard had, however, thou^t deeply
upon the subject before the works of Blumenbach feU into nis hands,
and with these for a foundation it has been presented in a better
form and with clearer illustration. The comparative phyaology
and psychology of the different human races has never before beeai
made the express subject of inquiry.

In the first of these volumes. Dr. Prichard has impartially investi-
gated the question with regard to die unity of the origin of the ho-
man races, which he successfully endeavors to decide by analogieB

* Lectures on Physiology, Zoology, and the Natural History of
Man. London, 1819.

I

1838.] Tit^cnot'$ Mtiicai FhHotophy. 8M

drawn ftom the Tegetable and anknal world. He takes « ttand (in
which Lawrence* agrees with him,) in opposition to the French pm-
lotophers who openly proclaim in defiance of the sacred Writ the
diversi^ of origin of whites, negroes, etc. etc. The degrading the-
ories of Voltaire, Desmoulins, Ruddphi, Bory de St Vincent, Vireyy
and Lamarck, are satisfactorily confuted, and the truth of the Mosaic
1^ account is fully substantiated.

I Researches into the physical ethnography of the African races,

with comparative vocabularies of African languages and dialects are
I comprised in the second volume of the third edition. The sound-

I ness of his arguments, the clear and philosc^hical language wluch

I lie emplcyys, together with his extensive information and unwearied

industry, render Dr. Prichard's work highly iustructive, as well as
essentially different, and mord satisfactory than any other treatise on
' the same subject. ^^ It would be difficult,'^ says Dr. Wiseman,^ for any

' <Nie in future to treat of the physical hbtory of man without being

' indebted to Dr. Prichard for a great portion of his materials.^*

' The work will probably extend to several volumes, as l^ iar the

' most interesting and the largest portion of the human &mily i» yet

I left uninyeMigated.

3. — A Popular IVeaHse an Mtdieal Phibsopky, or un EzposUhn

of Quackery and Imposture in Medicine. By Ckdib Tich^

\ nor, M. 2>., Author of " The Philosophy of Living" (No.

77, Harpers' Family Library,) New York : Gould and
Newman, 1838, pp. 2^.

Effectually to put down quackery is a bold undertaking. Yet we
are told in the preface to this work mat the author aims at nothing less.
We highly applaud his motives, and wish him all possible success*
We feel an unfeigned respect for his talents and amiable qualities,
and have no doubt his work will be the means of great good. We
must however express the belief that the foundation of quackery lies
too deep in the constitution of our nature to be thus easily cured ; it
19 the tmlnus irremedioMe of thd body social, and all the hellebore
that ever grew in Antic3rra cannot purge it away. Is it not so ?
Lord Bacon tells us that *^ witches and impostors have always held a
competition with physicians.'^ Old Galen complains of me same,
and observes that his patients were more obedient to the oracle in
the temple of Aesculapius, and to their own dreams, than to his
prescriptions. The philosophic Cicero and Aurelian were under the
mfluence of medical superstition, and even Ix>rd Bacon believed in
the Influence of charms and amulets. The great Boyle recommend-
ed the thigh bone of an executed criminal as a specific in dysentery.
Dr. Johnson believed in second sights and all have read of the
MynpaihsLic powder of Sir Kenelm Digby, which was believed ta

* Lectures, p, 11^

340 Critical Notices. [Jult

cvare any wound, by its applicatioQ to the weapon which caused the
injury.

To come down to our own times, have we not seen almost whole
communities spell-bound, for a time, in the belief of the efficacy of
the royal touch y—o{ the successive manipulations of the seventh
son ; — of natural bone-setters ;'-of homoopathia and animal mag-
netism ; — and have not all the vagaries and absurd conceits of tlie
last been endorsed by men of high reputation ? And if, at any time,
there are symptoms of returning sense in the community, do we not
immediately see signs of another plague of frogs, or lice, or some-
thing yet more loathsome, coming up to devour the land ?

Trie work before us deserves more than a passing notice. It is a
philosophical treatise, giving an account of the origm of medicine, a

general view of the human body and its divisions ; — ^the anatomy and
iseases of the digestive organs, a description of the organs of res-
piration, of the cutaneous system,— of the eye,— of female com-
plaints,—of rheumatism, — of deafness, — of cancer, — of measles, —
of natural bone-setters,— of the comparative powers of vegetable
and mineral medicines, — of the errors, exclusiveness and wtiaism
of medical men, and their influence in causing and perpetuating
empiricism ; — and, last, though not least in importance, we have a
chapter on the influence of clergymen in the cause and ^lead of
quackery.

The aim of the author was to spread before the public, in a cheap
and condensed form, a sufficient amount of anatomical and physio-
logical truth to serve as an antidote to all the varieties of qimckeiy
which noLj arise. The plan, it must be acknowledged, is a &od
one. It is indeed the only plan adapted to have any eflect Mere
declamation here is useless. Still we adhere to our opinion that the
case is a hopeless one, and he must be a very sanguine man who
thinks differently.

While we admit the general excellence of the matter of this vol-
ume, we have some misgivings with regard to the wisdom or cor-
rectness of tlie fifleenth chapter, ^' on the errors, exclusiveness and
uUraism of medical men,'' etc Is such an exposi as Ihis likely to
put down quackery ? We humbly opine that its tendency is to in-
crease it If our author's representations here were wholly true,
we should almost be ready to enrol ourselves the disciples of orand-
reth in Physic and of Graham in diet, and bid defiance to the medi-
cal profession. But with all deference, we conceive the doctor has
rather overstated the case of his medical brethren. He has aimed
to make a strong case without stopping at every step to inquire
whether his positions were all just. We refer to this chapter through-
out, but especially to pages 233 and 234. However physkuans
may differ amon^ themselves in theory, we believe that in the treat-
ment of acute diseases, which constitute an immense majority of
cases, they do not materially vary in practice.

1838J BtiMt Commentary m Qenesu. 241

Those who have read the ^ Philosophy of Living,** by the same
author, need not be told that Dr. Tlcknors style is easy, natural ami
elegant. An air of simplicity and earnestness characterizes his
works. Sanguine in temperament, his views partake in some degree
of his own ardor, and designed as they are to promote the best in*
terests of society, and to counteract the various forms of error, we
cannot but hope and believe that the present work will rival the for^
mer in usefulness and popularity.

3. — Professor Bush's Commentary on Genesis, New York, 1888.

We have received a few of the first pages of this Commentary.
It is much in the form of Mr. Barneses Notes on the New Testament
We have before, frequently, expressed our high opinion of the value
of Mr. Bushes exegetical labors. His remarks exhibit extensive
learning, yet modestly and not unnecessarily protruded, and the
happy talent of exhibiting perspicuously and briefly the meaning of
the sacred writers, while his moral reflections are generally pertinent
and striking. It is not a preaching commentary, but a thoroughly
exegetical one, and well adapted both to the learned and the com-
mon reader. The theories which are occasionally advanced to ac-
count for particular facts are not dogmatically propounded, and
serve, on ihe whole, to give liveliness and interest to the observa-
tions. Professor Bush has had extensive opportunities to become
thoroughly versed in the great department or biblical illustration.
The pages before us give the rich fruits of that knowledge. The
autbor^s mind is too candid and liberal to induce him to wish that
others should accord with him on every point, at least until after
thorough examination. With many of the notes on the first chapter
of Genesis we entirely concur. Bespecting the correctness of a few
statements we are in doubt On p. 26 it is remariced, that ^^ it is a
matter rather of rational inference than of express revelation, that
the material universe was created out of nothing. Yet it is such an
inference as cannot be resisted without doing violence to the funda-
mental laws of human belief It appears to us, however, that the
writer oi the epistle to the Hebrews asserts directly, 11: 2, that the
world was created by God out of nothing. ^ The things wluch are
seen, i. e. the visible universe, were not made of things which do
appear.^ The to in ft^i (paiPOfUptop would be eaually conclusive
against any pre-existing materials, to whatever fleological theory we
may be attached. Prof. Bush adopts, p. 31, wiu some distincuashed
geologists, the theory of indefinite days. If the fiict adduceoTby ge-
ologists (see Introduction to Buckland's Bridgewater Treatise) be well
established, that of the 9000 species of the fossil remains of puintsand
animals, in the tertiary formation, less than 600 are identical with
living species, while the mass of those that are identical, occur in
the uppermost members even of the tertiary strata, or, in other

Vol. XII. No. 31. 31

942 Critical Notices. [Jvhr

words, that the fossil remams do not correspond with the order of
the six days' creation, then the theory of indefinite days is unsoood
and unnecessary. Bib. Repos. YI. 309. " And for days and years.
As the word for is here omitted before years^ though occurring be-
fore each of the other terms, the sense of the phrase is undoubtedly
^ for days even years ;^ implying that a day is often to be taken for
a yeoTy as is the case in prophetical compilations.^' We think that
it is much more probable that days here means twenty-four hours
only, and that there is an ellipsis of b before S'*:;b . The Septua-
gint has $ig iviavrovg. Mr. Bush's theory in respect to the topo-
graphy of Eden is, that it embraced the countries known at present
as Cabool, Persia, Armenia, Koordistan, Syria, Arabia, Abjrssinia
and Egypt The Pison is supposed to be the Indus, the Gibon, the
Nile, and Havilah to be situated on the borders of India. There
are, unquestionably, serious difficulties connected with either of the
almost innumerable hypotheses on the topography of Eden. Yet
the one which assigns the location to Armenia is, we are constrained
to believe, the most probable. Some of the other theories assume
that the deluge produced greater changes in the earth than seem to
have been possible, or at least probable.

4. — Tlie True Intellectual System of the Universe: Wherein aM
the reason and philosophy of atheism is confuted^ and its
impossibility detnonstrated. Also a Treatise on Immutahh
MoraUty ; with a Discourse concerning the true notion of
the Lords Supper ; and two Sermons on I John 2: •!« 4 and
I Cor, 15: 67- By Ralph Cudworth, D, D, With refer-
ences to the several quotations in the Intellectual Systan, and
an account of the Life and Writings of the Author : By
Thomas Birch, M, A. F, R. S. First American Edition,
In two volumes. Andover and New York : Gould & New-
man, 1838. pp. 804, 756.

Dr. Cud worth was born, in 1617, at Aller, in Somersetshire, of
which parish his father was rector. He was admitted a pensioner
at Emanuel College, Cambridge, at the age of 13. His diligenoe
as an academical student was very great ; and, in 1639, he took the
degree of M. A., and was elected feUow of his college. He became
so distinguished as a tutor, that tlie number of his pupils exceeded
all precedent. In due time, he was presented by his college to the
rectory of North Cadbury in Somersetshire. In 1642, he took the
degree of B. D., and was chosen master of Clare Hall, and, in the
following year, was made Regius professor of Hebrew. In 1651,
be was made D. D., and in 1654, was chosen master of Christ's
coUe^, Cambridge. Here, in the bosom of his family, he spent the
remamder of his days. In 1678, he ptiblished his great work. The
Intellectual System. The moral as well as mental character of this

1838.] Wismaii on CaihoKcim. S43

distinguished scholar stood Tory hish, and he died universally la-
mented, in 1688, in the 71st year of nis age.

The Intellectual System was intended, m the first instance, to be
an essay against the doctrine of necessity only ; but perceiving that
this doctrine was maintained bv different individuals on various
grounds, he arranged these opmions imder three separate heads,
which he intended to treat of in three books ; but his Intellectual
System relates only to the first, viz, " The material Necessity of
all things without a God, or absolute Atheism.^^

Many of our readers will welcome this handsome American
edition of this great man^s works. The matter which, in the English
editions, is contained in two cumbersome quartos or in four octavos,
is here comprised in two compact octavos, besides embracing what
none of the English editions of the Intellectual System do contain,
the profound and noble treatise on Immutable Morality. This latter
has long been out of print. It was published more than forty years
afler the author^s death by Dr. Edward Chandler, bishop of London.
It is in fact, though not professedly, an answer to the writings of
Hobbes and of some other infidels whose opinions took away the
essential and immutable distinctions between moral right and wrong.
In addition to these various treatises, and Dr. Birches Life of Dr.
Cudworth, there is subjoined an analysis of the whole, amounting to
nearly 150 pages, which forms a very enlightened abstract or
abridgment of the various treatises.

5. — Lectures on the principal Doctrines and Practices of the
Catholic Church, delivered at St. Mary's Moorjields, during
the Lent of 1836. By Nicholas Wiseman, D. D. Pro^
fessor in the university of Rome, foreign member of the
Royal Society of Literature, corresponding member of the
Royal Asiatic Society. 2 vols. 12mo. 1836. pp. 332, 244.

We have entertained a high opinion of the candor and talents of
Dr. Wiseman. His Lectures on the Connection between Science
and Revealed Religion furnished conclusive evidence, we thought,
of a discriminating, liberal and philosophical mind — a mind well
disciplined, open to evidence, not bigotted, and intently seeking in-
formation from all accessible sources. The Lectures do not pro-
fess to be profound, and original investigations on the various subr
jects which pass under review. But they appear to he a well-con-
densed outlme of the most important facts in the recent developmenta
of science and literature \vhich go to establish the authority of re-
vealed religion. Assuch they have commended themselves to the
favorable attention of some of our best scholars, and of the con-
ductors of our prin(iipal magazines, as the North American Review
and the American Journal of Science. In these Lectures, Dr..
Wiseman does not hold the pen of a partizan, or of a Roman Catho-
lic, but of a well-read scholar.

344 Critical Noticts. [Jolt

What then was our surpriae on opening the yolume oo die
Doctrines and Practices of the Catholic Church. A more unftir,
one-sided, dishonest diatribe our eyes never beheld than is oootaiiied
in Lectures VI. and VII. on the practical success of the Protestant
and Catholic Rule of Faith in converting heathen nations. It would
do honor to the most fervent and sturdy disciple of Inigo de Loyola.
We will proceed to substantiate our allegation by sufficient prooft.
1. Criminal want of care in seeking information concerning Praiest-
ant missions. Vol. H. p. 166, Dr. W. says " I have not always had
the convenience of consulting documents down to the very latest
period ; and I have therefore been obliged to content myself witli
such as have come within my reach. I mention this cautionarT
circumstance for this purpose, that, if I do not always quote the
notices received within this and the last year, it may not be supposed
that I have been ruled by a wish to avcnd what might appear ad-
verse to my assertions.'^ But why did he not get the latest inibnna-
tton } Why depend on Reports several years old, when in half an
hour, he coold have obtained, gratuitously, the Reports of the very
year, 1896, when he was lectunn^ and writing? He quotes the Re-
port of 1838 of a Protestant minister in Canada, Dr. Morse's Uni-
versal Greography 1812, from Henry Martyn's Memoir published
more than 20 years ago, and from some remarks of Gordon Hall
made at Bombay in 1825. On p. 184, he says : '^ I may briefly
mention the mission which was attempted to be established, in the
Burmese empire, by means of Mr. Judson and his lady. They re-
sided there and, consequently, these results are from their own con-
fession ; that aher being there seven years, they had not made a
single convert ; that, afler the seventh year, the^ received one, and
that he afterwards brought another, so tiiat in the end they had four
proselytes ; when in consequence of the war breaking out, the
mission was broken up.'^ This is Dr. Wiseman's account of the
American Baptist mission in Burmah, which, by the way, he con-
founds with the English Baptist mission in Calcutta. This he would
give as the present results of the Burmcui mission, when, if he had
consulted the London Missionary Re^er, with which he seems to
be acquainted, he would liave found m the No. for February 1896,
ihoXfour hundred {tnd forty-four natives had been received into the
communion of the Baptist churches in Burmah. 2. Dr. Wiseman
frequently quotes authorities who are secretly or openly, the ene-
mies of all missions. Such are the London Quarterly Mview, the
British Critic, the Asiatic Journal, the Noveau Journal Asiatique,
Capt Basil HalU Klaproth and Gambia. 'What must we think of a
wnter who will quote such authorities as the " voyage of H. M. S.
Blonde to the siandwich Islands,^^ ^^Eotzebue^s Second Voyage
round the world,^^ and Augustus Tode^s ^' account of a nine month s
Residence in New Zealand ?'^ Yet he says he ^' quotes no authorities
which can be considered hostile to missionary societies.^ 3. Wbea

1838.] lAft and Discwrset cf S. H. Sieams. 245

he extracts from our own authorities, he extracts only what is most
discouraging; he dwells at larce on the history of a decayed
mission ; he shows where the Moravians have failed ; he parades
the most desponding sentiments of a disheartened missionary. 4.*
He generally passes over in perfect silence the most popular «nd
important missions. He makes not the slijghtest allusion to the T^nne*
▼elly mission, which m 1829 contained S243 souls who werer so fiur
Christians as to have renounced idolatry. He refera not at all to the
Church mission in New Zealand, to the American mission in Ceylon,
to none of the missions in South Africa. In respect to the West
Indies, where the glorious triumphs of the gospel are recorded
and known the world over, unless it be at Rome, he merely says in a
note, ^^ I regret being obliged from fear of becoming tiresome, to
omit the histoiy of attempted conversion in the West Indies, where
the series of failures is as remarkable as in the other parts of the
world of which I have treated." 5. When Dr. W. happens to meet
with some instances of Protestant conversions, be explains them
away by assigning them to secular causes, local influence, etc. 6^
He gives the most exaggerated statements of the success of the
Roman Catholic missions, past and present But we have no space
to enlarge.

These Lectures of Dr. Wiseman are well worth readfng, notwith*
standing. There is no want of plausibility, of acuteness, of powers
of reasoning, and of information respecting the Roman Catholic
Church. We may be sure that the author has made the best of his
cause. The subjects of the Lectures are the Protestant rule of faith,
the Catholic rule of faith, authority of the Church, practical success
of the two rules of faith, supremacy of the pope, penance, satisfac-
tion and purgatory, indul^nces, invocations of sainto, their relics and
images, and transubstantiation.

6. — Life and Select Discourses of the Rev. Samuel H. Steams.
Boston : Josiah A. Steams, 1838. pp. 410.

Among the thoughts, which have crowded upon us in reading
ibis memoir is the truth of the inspired declaration " that the heart
knoweth its own bitterness." Not strangers alone, but even intimate
friends cannot always " intermeddle" with it. Mr. Stearns gene-
rally wore an air of unaffected cheerfuLoess. Mingled with his habit-
ual thoughtfulness, there was sometimes a playful manner and a
joyousness of spirits which little betrayed the tender melancholy and
sadness, sometimes amounting to deep depression, which character-
ized his inward life. We do not mean that there was a contrariety
between his feelings and actions. No one was less chargeable with
dishonesty or pretension. Neither did he cherish a murmuring spirit
at the dispensations of his heavenly Father. But with an uncommon
union of the powers of reasoning and of imagination, with a highly

346 Critical Notices. [July

cultivated taste, with a lofty standard of moral and intellectual excel-
lence, with warm and generous feelings, with a peculiarly ausceptibie
temperament, and surrounded by strong-minded and strong-bodied as*
sociates who were pressing on, unretarded, in the path of honorable
usefulness — Mr. Stearns had, for many years,— an adequate cause
for melancholy — a broken physical constihUioru From his junior
year in college till his death, he was a weak, if not a sick man. No
dependence could be placed on the fragile tenement Hope was
strong and elastic, only to be disappointed. Many times did he es-
say to labor in his Master's vineyard, even if it were but for a " little
season,'^ but his shattered energies refused their aid, and Dothing
remained but a suspension or abandonment of the dearly loved pui^
suit Yet there were not wanting those who blamed him for not
sooner accepting some one of the numerous invitations which were
tendered to him to settle as a christian pastor. But such persons
did not know him. They mistook his generally serene countenance
and upright gait as the index of considerable, if not entire, bodily en-
ergies. They did not know that the strings of the pleasant harp
were broken. They could not read the secret history of his mind,
or if not absolutely secret, known to but few of his friends. He
longed for the pastoral office. He ^* stretched out his hands^
towards the'good work, but it fled from his embrace.

Mr. Steams was the eldest son of the Rev. Samuel Steams, the
late beloved minister of Bedford, Ms. He was born Sept 12, 1801.
In 1816, he entered Phillips Academy, in Andover. In June 1817,
he became a member of his father^s church. In 1819, he entered
Harvard Universitv. At his graduation in 1823, he gave the saluta-
tory addresses in Latin. On taking his second degree in 1826, he
delivered the master^s valedictory in Latin. From the autumn of
1823 to the spring of 1825, he was an assistant teacher in Phillips
Academy, in December, 1825, he joined the theological seminaiy
in the same place, where he remained three years. From 1890 to
1834, he preached, occasionally, in various places, always with
much acceptance. April 16, 1834, he was ordained over the Old
South Church in Boston. But in two or three sabbaths, his strength
was wholly gone. AAer resorting to various means for the recov-
ery of his wasted powers, a voyage to Europe was determined upon.
He sailed for London June 8, 1836. He travelled extensively in
Great Britain, France, Switzerland and Grermany, and spent the
winter of 1836 — 7 in Italy. In the spring of 1837, he returned to
Paris to die. This event took place May 15, 1838. His remains
were brought to this country, and interred, with many tears, at
Mount Auburn.

Fraternal affection has well performed the biographical office.
All is done which we could desire. Every thing is in taste and in
excellent keeping with the subject of the memoir. The mechanical

1838.] Nordheimer^s Hebrew Granmar. S4T

execution of tlie volume is beautiful. We have seen no American
biography which will compare with it, in this respect. About one
half of the volume is occupied with the memoir, and the other half
with the sermons and other compositions of Mr. Steams. No culti-
vated and christian mind will be tempted to stop till the volume
is read through.

7. — A . Critical Grammar of the Hebrew Language, By Isaac
NardhezmeTj doctor in philosophy of the tmioersity of Munich^
Professor of Arabic^ Syriac and other oriental languages in
the university of the city of New York, New Yo A : Wiley
& Putnam, 1838. Vol. I. pp. 280.

Our first remark in relation to this Grammar is the exceeding
correctness with which it is printed. The difficulties of reaching,
not an immaculate text, for that is out ^^ ^he question, but a text
which may be pronounced accurate, are known only to the few who
have made the attempt where thcjoe is a profusion of Hebrew,
Arabic and Syriac points and letters. The printer, Mr. B. L.
Hamlen of New Haven, Ct, and the superintendent of the press>
Mr. Turner, deserve great credit for their successful pains. But
few books, exclusively English, are more handsomely printed than
this Grammar. We have read many pages without notidng any
material errors which are not marked in the errata. We have not,
however, critically examined the volume in respect to this point.

Our second remark is, that the author evidently possesses rich
stores of oriental learning. He familiarly illustrates his positions
not only from the dialects kindred to the Hebrew, but from Persian,
Sanscrit, etc. He seems to have shared largely in that faculty and
diligence in acquiring languages for which the Germans are so re-
nowned. Our author^s production exhibits not the mere appear
ance, but the results, of extensive and profound personal researches*
We presume that the grammar will receive attention in the native
land of the author, and not simply in the country of his adopdon.
While he pays all suitable acknowledgments to the great name and
merits of 6esenius, he does not blindly follow him, nor any other
master. He gives due credit to Ewald, but is not willing to sub-
scribe to all his theories.

In the third place, the general arrangement appears to us to be
perspicuous ana well-chosen. Indeed, m many respects, on this
point, it does not differ materially from the common Hebrew
Grammars. Not a few of the changes may be real improvements,
yet in regard to a few, we cannot yet see our way clear. We must
prefer, for instance, Gesenius^s distribution of the nouns into about
a dozen declensions. We would not pertinaciously retain exactly
thirteen declensions. Why is it not better, however, to have a
sufficient number of distinct declensions to embrace all the im-

248 Crtiical Natieei. [Jolt

portant diflbreooes in the nouns, rather than to confine ^lem to four
or six, and then he obliged to make four or five subdiYisions under
each of the four ? Still, we are aware, that to many minds, die
great number of declensions into which the nouns are distrihutBd
IS in many grammars a stumbling block and a grievance. Such
will, doubtless, be pleased with the arrangement of Mr. Nordheimer.

Again, a most important characteristic of the grammar before us
is the endeavor to assign the reasons for the various forms and
usages of the Hebrew language. The author appears to have
brought to this subject a very philosophical and discnminating mind.
No inconsiderable light has thus hf>ea shed on manv intricate paths
and dark corners. What, seemed to be mere accident or conven-
tional usage is found to be in accordcmce with the nature of man
and with sound philosophy. Still, we are not sure but that the
author has pushed his efforts in this direction too fiir. Some per-
sons, at least, may think that language is afiected in a considerate
degree by mere contingencies, or by fortuitous incidents which are
incapable of explanation. However, the efibrts of Mr. Nordheim^
in this department are worthy of all praise. The Hebrew language
is full of life and ener^, and the grammarian and lexicographer
should possess those views and feelings which will enable him to
infuse a corresponding vitality and force into his researches.

We conclude this brief notice by expressing our cordial thanks to
the author for this valuable addition to our helps in Hebrew study.
May he reap a rich reward for his toils. The country of his adop-
tion will welcome all such strangers as he, who comes to us richly
freighted with that which is more precious than gold, yea, than fine
gold.

B.—The Life and Times of George WkU^idd. By Robert PAOm,
caUhffr of the Experimental Guides^ etc New Yoik : D.
Appleton 6i Co. 18S8. pp. 554.

Mr. Philip's works have been widely spread and have produced

food fruits both in this country and in England. Hb style, however,
as never been any great favorite of ours. It will do very well for
a few pages. But we tire in reading a long book, or successive
treatises. There is an afiectation of point, terseness, striking terms,
acute observations. Mr. Philip is, doubtless, far from supposing that
there is any affectation in his manner. But what may seem to
to himself to be natural, appears to us to be extremely unnatural
This characteristic comes out in the titles to some of his books. He
attempts to entrap the reader by some strange combination of
words, which on examination is specious and curious rather than
weighty and judicious. The Preface to Whitefield^s Life contains
eighteen lines, of which the following are the last eight ^ In re-
gwltothe 9tyk of this work I have nothing to say; except that it k

1838.] Memoir of E. P. Lovg'ay. 24^

n»y oum way of telling the facts of personal history. The time is
not yet come for the pMlosopky of Whitefield^s Life. It is, however,
fast approaching ; and, therefore, my mass of facts will soon he
turned to good account by myself, or by some one. In the mean-
time, Whitefield will be knovm to the public ; which he was not until
now.^ The last sentence is not wholly correct Whitefield has
been known and justly known, for a long time, at least in the United
States. Mr. Phihp^s book will deepen old impressions, rather than
awaken any very important new ones. How the matter stands in
England we do not know.

Still, we tender our acknowledgments to Mr. Philip for his work.
Some new facts have been brought to light. Important contempo-
rary bi<^raphy and church history is introduced. The misrepre-
sentations of Bobert Southey are corrected. The balance is struck
with much discrimination and fairness between Whitefield and Wes-
ley and his brethren. The times in which Whitefield came upon
the stage are correctly appreciated. Mr. 'Philip shows that he has a
^ood acquaintance with this country, and is willing to judge fhirly of
Its inhabitants. If he falls into error in respect to names and dates,
if he does not always fully understand our con^gationalism, our
state of society, our modes of thinking and actmg, we can readily
pardon an Englishman and a stranger. These errors and misjudg-
ments are, oa the whole, remarkably few, and in general, unimpor-
tant

The book will be read, and it deserves to be. Every candid
reader will pardon the alliterations of the style for the sake of the
matter, and for the sake of the subject ; and wJutt a subject I shining
as the brightness of the firmament forever and forevei^— casting
many crowns at Jesus^ feet The memory of Whitefield will never
die on earth. It will gloriously flourish throughout '^ Heaven^s eter<
nal year.'^

9. — Memoir of the Rev. Elijah P, Lov^oy, who was murdered in
defence of the Liberty of the Press, at Alton, HUnois, Nov.
7, 1837. By Joseph and Owen Lovgoy : with an Introduc"
tion, by John Quincy Adams. New lork : John S. Taylor.

It la but a few months since our minds were shocked by the re-
ort of the scenes of lawless violence at Alton. The communi^,
igh in* its reputation for civil and social order, and even for chris-
tian philanthropy, — ^the victim, an accredited minister of the gospel,
pursuing the work of an editor, with benevolent intentions, and, as
he judged, in subordination to the laws of his couiitry, — the assaults,
deliberate, repeated, rising in violence and malignity, until at length,
consummatecl in murder ; — all these things conspire to render the
catastrophe peculiarly mournful and ominous.

Vol. XII. No. 31. 32

hig

S50 Critical Noiicti. [Jirur

A considerable portion of our readers, we appiehend, have beeo
accustomed to think of Mr. Lovejoy, as one of those turbulent and
obstinate spirits, whose influence is really beneficial to society only
as it is modified and changed by the over-ruling and corrective wis-
dom of God. If individuals of this class will take the trouble to
read this Memoir, we doubt not they will rise from the perusal, with
materially difierent impressions of his character as a whole. He
possessed the sodal sympathies in a high degree. His feelings
were warm, his attachments tender and enduring. As a son, a hus-
band, a father, he stands before us in an interesting light. His tii-
telledtud character was of a higher order than we had supposed.
Many readers will close .this volume with raised conceptions of
Xiovejoy as possessing the inspirations of poetry, as well as the pow-
er of wielding with much efiect, the compact vigor of pointed and
manly prose. His moral and religious character^ and in respect to
sinceiity and piety, were such as will not fail to command the re-
spect of reasonable men. Whatever may have been his errora in
judgment, he had great smcerity and strength of purpose, and was
calmly inflexible in prosecuting what he conscientiously deemed the
course of duty.

His brothers, the compilers of this memoir, though laboring under
some disadvantages, have, in the main, performed their work ¥rith
judgment and skill. The volume is interesting and instructive, it
IS the record of one whose life, though brief, had been eminently
useful, as well as singularly eventful.

9,— Journal of an Exploring Tour beyond the Bodcy Mouutakiay
under the direction of the American Board of Commissioners
for Foreign Missions^ performed in the years 183&, 1896, and
1837. Containing a description of the geography^ g^^gy^
climate^ and productions ; the number^ manners^ and customs of
the natives. With a map of Oregon Territory, By Res,
Samuel Parker. Ithaca, N. Y. 1838. pp. 371.

Mr. Parker set out upon his journey March 14, 1835, from
Ithaca, N. Y. On the 7th of April, with his companion. Dr.
Marcus Whitman, he started from St. Louis, Mo., in connection with
a caravan of the American Fur Company. On the 10th of August,
he thus describes the passage through the Rocky mountains. ^ Uold
winds were felt from the snow-topped mountains to an uncomfortable
degree. The passage through iJiese mountains is in a valley, so
gradual in the ascent and descent, that I should not have known
that we were passing them, had it not been that as we advanced, the
atmosphere gradually became cooler, and at length we found the
perpetual snows upon our right hand and upon our led, elevated
many thousand feet above us — in some places, ten thousand. The
highest part of these mountains are found by measurement to be

1888.] Home Education. fiSl

eighteen thousand feet above the level of the sea. This valley
was not discovered till some years since. Mr. Hunt and his party,
more than twenty years ago, went near it, but did not find it, though
in search of some favorable passage. ' It varies in width from five
to twenty miles ; and following its course, the distance through the
mountains is about eighty miles, or four days' journey. Though
there are some elevations and depressions in this valley, yet, com-
paratively speaking, it is level. There would be no dimculty in the
way of constructing a rail road from the Atlantic to the Pacific
ocean ; and, probably, the time may not be veryfar distant, when
trips will be made across the continent," etc. This is truly a re-
markable discovery. If the facts should prove to be, as they appear
from Mr. Parker^s description, it is one of the most extraordinary
provisions for the convenience of man ever made in the Providence
of Grod in the solid frame-work of the globe. We could have wish*
ed that Mr. Parker had gone into full details and given us an exact
account of the whole of this road excavated by the finger of God.

Mr. Parker pursued his journey among the mountains, 'stopping at
various places, holding consultation with the Indians, and coltectmg
various mformation, till he reached the mouth of the Columbia river.
On the 28th of June, 1836, he embarked for the Sandwich Islands,
and in sixteen days anchored in the roads of Honolulu. He reached
New London, Ct on the 18th of May, 1837.

A great variety of interesting information will be found m the
volume. There is^ an air of honesty and entire trustworthiness
about all the* statements. But little, comparatively, is mentioned but
what fell under the author's own observation. Mr. Parker seems to
have had quite a tact for working his way among Indians, hunters,
trappers, half-breeds and the heterogeneous multitude with whom he
came in contact. Many of the Indians seem waiting for the gospel of
Christ, and are ardently desiring teachers to be sent to them. The
style of the volume is simple and unadorned. There is an occa-
sional use of language which will be called cant by some persons.
A part of it, as where the author speaks of his own religious feelings,
might have been well spared. In one place, Mr. Parker makes use
of ohlimscited ; we know not in what vocabulary he found the term.

10. — Home Education, By the author of Natural History of En-
thusiasm, London : Jackson & Walford, 1838. pp. ^9.

So far as we have had opportunity to peruse this book, its views
meet with our cordial approbation. The author does not appear as
a profound reasoner, a curious speculatist, an investigator of christian
antiquities, but as a practical man, explaining the principles by which
he Ls guided in the education of his own children. Much of it is,
however, in the author's peculiar and original manner. AAer some
observations in regard to home economy in general, he mtroducea

SS2 Critical Nittices. [Jvlt

the subject of a systematic culture of the mind, by sufi^esting some
methods for eliciting, and for enriching, those factuSes tl^t aie
passive, and recipient chiefly, and which, as they are deyeloped
early, demand the teacher's attention before the time when any
strenuous labors ought to be exacted from children. Mr. Taylor
does not decide in favor of an exclusive system of Home Education.
Great benefits attach to School Discipline, whether effected on
a larger or smaller scale. Whatever may be said of female educa-
tion, that of boys could not, in the majority of instances, be well
conducted beneath the paternal roof. Still, the author thinks that
home education, if the principles and methods proper to it are weQ
understood, is both practicable and preferable in more instances
than has been of^en supposed, and especially so for girls ; and, also,
that this system is susceptible of improvements, such as could not
fail, if adopted to a considerable extent, very sensibly to promote the
moral and intellectual advancement of the community.

The distinguishing recommendations of private intellectual educa-
tion are 1. That the stress of the process may be made to rest upon
sentiment and principle, and the deep reciprocal affections of the
teacher and the taught, instead of its falling upon law, routine and
mechanism. 2. That eveiy thing, in method and matter, may be
exactly adapted to the individual capacities and tastes of the learner,
and the utmost advantage of culture secured for every special talent
3. That it is, or may be, wholly exempt from the incumbrance and
despotism of statutes, or of immemorial but irrational usages, or of
prevalent notions, and may come altogether under the control of
good sense, and is free to admit every good practice ; and 4. That,
while public education is necessarily a system of hastened devel(»-
ment, private education is free to follow out the contraiy principle
of retarded development.

These and other considerations are urged in an effective and
interesting manner. The whole, so far as we can judge, is a veiy
enlightened, just and christian view of a most important subject

12.— M, T. Cicerama ad QuiiUum Fratrem Dialogi Tres De Oraion,
Ex editiombus Oliveti ei Emesti. Aceedunt Notae AngUcae.
Cura C, K, DiUaway, A, M. Bostoniae : Perkins et Mar-
vin, 1838. Tom. I. 226. U. 229.

We are glad to see that these unpretending and valuable labors of
Mr. Dillaway are sufficiently appreciated by the public to permit
him to proceed in his coiu'se. He has now in press one of the come-
ijies of Terence. The series will probably combine a selection in
three volumes from the works of Tacitus, one volume of Plautus,
and the remaining works of Cicero in eight volumes. The succes-
sive volumes are printed with uncommon beauty and correctness.
The notes are apposite and well adapted to the wants of the young
student.

1838.] LUerary and MUctU. tUeSigence. 253

Id.'^Memair of Mrs. 8arah Louisa Ta^hr: or an lUustraiion of
ike Work of ike Holy Spirit, in awahaiing, renewing, and
sanctifying the heart. By Lot Jones, A. M,, Missionary in
the city of New York, in charge of the Mission Church of the
Epiphany. New York : John S. T&ylqr, 1838. pp. 824

One of the reaaoni assigned by the author, for his having consent-
ed to compile this memoir, is ^^ that he felt a deep interest in the
subject, with a strong conviction, that, if suitably prepared, it could
not fail to be useful.^ This conviction, we think, was well founded.
It is an interesting and instructive exhibition of female character and
piety ; and if associations with purity and truth are suited to improve
both the heart and the life, the circulation of such memoirs as this
win not fail to exert a salutery though silent influence on the public
mmd

ARTICLE XII.

LiTEBART AND MISCELLANEOUS INTELLIGENCE.

Stnftclv Atstts.

IMfrary rftke Jfho York Theological Seminary.
The Oireotori of the New York Theological Seminary, through the
agenej of Frof. Robinion and others, have recently purchased the Iiibrazy
of the Rer, Dr. Leander Van Ess of Bavaria in Germany, well known aa
the Tolnntary and sucoessful agent of the British and Foreign Bible Society
among the Roman Catholics of that coantry . Th is Library contains upwards
of 13,000 Folames. Among which are most of the works of the Grttk and
Latin Fatkert, Ms Londdm and ParU Polyglots, VgolmP$ Thesaurus,
MoutVs ConeiUa, etc. etc. In the department of church history it is said to
be quite full, and in all the departments, there are many works which are
rare and of very high value. Dr. Van Ess has been forty years collecting
this Library, and has now generously consented to dispose of it to an
American Seminary for about one fifth part of its original cost to himself.
The purchase is already made, and the books are probably now on their
way to New York, where a commodious building is in the process of erec«
tion, and will be ready for the reception of the Library and for the other
purposes of the Seminary early in the antumn. Such an accession to the
stores of theological learning in our country is highly auspicious and
creditable to the Institution which has thus early availed itself of its ad-
yantages.

254 LUerary and MUeelt. B^dHgence. [July

We learn that Mr. Doponeeaa of Philadelphia has nearly ready fiw the
preaa a learned work on language. — ^The Liie of the Rev. Dr. Jonathan
May hew of Boiton, hy A Men Bradford, LL. D. haa jaat been pvbliafaed. —
JUt. Dr. Humphrey, president of Amherst College, haa published his
Letters, originally inserted in the New York Obeerrer, in two handsome
duodecimo volumes. These fjotters hare aoquired a deserved eelebrity for
sound sense, and discriminating remark. They are written in a lively and
forcible manner. They show how an author, with Dr. Humphrey's strong
powers of observation and of thinking, can go over a beaten track and doI
find it all barren .—Rev. Pres. Fisk's Travels in Europe have reached a loarth
edition. V/e suppose that they have been widely circulated in the aothor's
own denomination. We have not seen them. — Professor ConanVs tranalar
tion of Gesenius's Hebrew Grammar is proceeding through the press

#raitce.

Baron De Saey,

We have received the following tribute to the memory of M. De Sacy
Irom an American gentleman who is devoting himself to Arabic literatnre,
and who listened to the voice of De Sacy until it was closed in death. At a.
future day we may give our readers a more extended biography <^ this great
scholar, with a list of his works.

" The illustrious tovant Baron Sylvestre De Sacy died in Paris on the
twenty-first of February, 1838, from the effects of a stroke of apoplexy, at
the age of eighty years. The object of this brief notice is not to attempt to
describe the peculiar features of mind and tone of sentiment which so dis-
tinguished him among his own countrymen, and have made his name so
honored throughout Europe, but merely to pay to his memory a passing tribute
of respect. He was born in the year 1758, and, while yet in early life, was
engaged in the study of the oriental languages, being led to these porsniti
by the inclination of his own taste. In the year 1795, when the school of
modern oriental languages was established at the Royal Lihraiy in Paris, he
was chosen to the chair of Arabic, and it was at this time that he first de>
voted himself to that department of literature over which he threw so much
light and which he so adorned, during nearly half a century, to the day of
his death.

'< He was a most dUigetU scholar ; his works are very numerous consider-
ing the profound subjects of which they treat, though they are but very lii>
tie known in our country. It was so late even as the commencement of
the present year that he published a treatise, in two octavo volumes, on the
Religion of the Druses. Nor was he at all superficial, or a charlatan in his
researches, as alas ! too many of the French savans are, — he was Uieritms^
patient and aeetirate. Probably no European has ever so thoroughly studied
the works of the celebrated Arabic grammarians, or unravelled with such
Muteness their many valuable suggestions on the principles of langnags

1838.] JAUrary and MisceU. hteUigence. 855

from the intricacies of their exceedingly fanciful mode of thought He wa»
diatingaiahed, alao, through life, for the purity of the motivea which actuated
his zeal. He did not stride with narrow selfishness afler an imagined elew
tion in the eyes of his countrymen and of the world, but he labored from the
loTC of learning and a desire to be. useful in diffusing it. In the course of
his long life honors accumulated upon him, yet he did not give himself up
to self-complacent idleness, or to the feeling, too common in France, that a>
he ascended step by step higher in dignity, he was forbidden to touch foot
again on bis former lower fields of action. Thus, even on the day when the
stroke which proired fatal fell upon him, this venerable man had been seated
aide by side with his pupils in Arabic, bearing . as usual with all the vexa-
tious inaccuracies which so finished a scholar could not but mark. He had
also made his appearance in the cabinet of manuscripts at the Royal Library,
to examine some Persian MSS. which the government was then proposing'
to purchase ; — and he had filled his seat in the Chamber of PeerS| and had
spoken upon the subject then in debate.

** A word or two more may be hazarded in regard to his religious charac^
ter. He was a devoted Jansenist, and was strenuously opposed to the awful
innovations of that godless spirit of anarchy which has swept over France.
It is to be hoped that all his high attainments were crowned by that pearl of
great price, surpassing all the riches of the East

'< Most of the distinguished orientalists of Europe have listened to the
instructions of Baron De Sacy,yetfew are to be found, at present, in France,
who walk in his steps. M. Garcen De Tassy, however, one of his former
pupils and most &vored firiend, now professor of Hindostanee in the same
school where he labored so long, seems to have imbibed much of the same
spirit, and it is a pleasure to think that France may yet possess a savant t»
fill hU place."

The following are some of the volumes which have recently Been pu^
lished in €rermany~Ast's Lexicon Platonicum sive vocum Platonicamm
Index, Vol. III. Fasciculus 2, nqcYQatpa — rl&ifii. The conclusion of the last
volume will be published in the beginning of the next year. — Snidae Lexi-
con Graece et Latine ad fidem optimorum librorum exactam poet Thomas
Gaisfbrdum recensuit et annotatione critica instruxit G. fiemharcfy. Tom. I.
Fasc. 4 et Tom. II. Fasc. 3. 4.— F. Nork has published an Etymological
Dictionary of the Latin language. — ^The Prophetical Spirit of the Hebrew*
by Dr. A. Knobel, professor of Theology at Breslau.— Rackert's Commenta-
ry on the second Epistle to the Corinthians. That on the first Epistle wa*
published in 1836.— Some of our readers will be glad to learn thst the third
section of Vol. IV. of Prof. Freytag*s great Arabic Lexicon is published*
The whole work will be finished in October next The professor will pub-
lish a smaller work entitled ** Lexicon Arabico Latinum ex opeie majore in

956 Literary and MisceU. hiettigenee. [1838.

usam tironum ezcerptam." — ProfeMor Wntke hu publiiheda Biblical Tbe-
ologj pIiiloBophicallj exhibited ; PaH 1. exhibits the reli^onof the Old TVe-
tament according to the canonical booka.

Profeuor Petermann of Berlin, has lately pablished a clear and soceioct
Grammar of the Armenian lan^ruage. — C. F. Neumann has published at
Leipsic an fissaj towards a History of Armenian literature freely drawn
from the works of the monks of the convent of Mechitar, at Venice. It wiD
he a useful assistant in all researches in this interesting but neglected part of
oriental literature. This literature deserves the attention of the learned
from the circumstance that translations of Greek writers, the originals of
which are lost, are still preserved in Armenia, The complete works of
Philo Judaeus are said to be extant in an Armenian version, and would be
published by learned natives, if sufficient encouragement were held out.
Within the last twenty years an Armenian translation of the Chronicle of
£nsiebius, filling up many lacunae in the original, has been discovered. An
edition of it in Armenian and Latin, and a Latin translation have appeared.
The lamented Niebuhr made it the subject of a learned and eUhonte
memoir in his Kleine Historische und Philogische Schriften.

Rev. John Dyer of Malacca has been, for some time, engaged in the
preparation of moveable metallic type for printing the Chinese. M. Panthier
is attempting to accomplish the same object in Paris. — ^In connection
the important effects of the medical practice of missionaries in China,
may state, that Sir Henry' Halford, president of the London college of
Physicians, lately read a paper before that body strongly recommending
the union of medical with theologioal knowledge in the prepaiatoxy studies
jnissionanes.

Errata. Page 41, line 14 from bottom, for irangeUcal read ^■wfilfyifsf.
P. 179, for Art. VII., read VIII. ; and each succeeding No. read one No. in
Advance.

AMERICAN

BIBLICAL REPOSITORY.

NO. xxxn.

OCTOBER, 1838.

ARTICLE L

Remabks on . Voluntary and Ecclssiabtical Obganisa-
tions fob thc promotion of benevolent objects.

By XiMOArd Woodf , D. D., Tb«olofical Bsmintrj, Andovet .

The object of the following article is, to promote free, candid
and fraternal discussion, and to do what can be done to bring
Christians to agree in their modes of doing good, or, if they
differ, to differ without strife, and in the exercise of brotherly
kindness. How deplorable at this day, is the prevalence of
party-spirit, — one mark of which is, that we see and acknowl-
edge nothing wrong in the party to which we belong, and
nothing right in the party opposed to us. For men of active
benevolence and piety, to whatever denomination or party they
belong, we ought to cherish a cordial affection and esteem.
Towards any who love the Lord Jesus Christ, we cannot in-
dulge ill-will or coldness, nor can we speak of them harshly or
unkindly, without sin. God loves all his people ; why should
not we ? God forgives their faults ; why should not we ? God
commands us to do them good ; why should not we obey ?—
Suppose good men differ from us ; this is no reason why we
should impugn their motives, or do any thing to injure their
personal character, or to curtail their useful influence ?

On the subject which I here introduce, I shall freely express
my own thoughts and conclusions, — thoughts not hasty^ but

Vol. XII. No. 32. 33

S58 Voluntary Societies, [Oct.

sober and deliberate ; and conclusioDS, not rashly adopted, but
resulting from long reflection, and long experience. And firom
the same reflection and experience, 1 derive a deep and grow-
ing conviction, that 1 am constantly liable to mistake, and that
on subjects like the present, I ought specially to guard against
undue confidence in my own opinions, and against all severe and
uncandid reflections against those ministers of Christ who enter-
tain other opinions. And if in what follows, a single unkind or
disrespectful word shall be found, I will heartily condemn it,
and wish it blotted out. — ^The attitude which 1 would take, is
that of one who sincerely inquires, what is the wUl of God.
Most cheerfully will I give the right hand of fellowship to all
who are seeking the good of Zioo, whatever modes of action
they may adopt ; and 1 would say only this one thing to those
who may judge difierently from me as to the mode of doing
good ; — Dear Brethren^ grant to me and those who think as I
doy what we freely grant to you ; — permit us quietly to labor
for the advancement of Chrisfs kingdom in the manner whiA
we think to be the vnsest and best, and most pleasing to God.

I have not proposed to go into a particular exammation of
the arguments which have been urged on one side or the other
of the subject here considered. The following article was
written at the close of the last year; and of course it had no
reference to any thing which has since been published. My de-
sign was to suggest a few thoughts kindly, and with as much
brevity as possible, for the consideration of men of intelligence
and piety, who are desirous of doing good in the safest and most
eflfectual manner.

There are some men of great excellence of character, who
think that the objects of benevolence should be accomplished by
the church of Christ, as a divinely organized body ; and that
there are valid objections against all attempts to do good on a
large scale, except by the church in its corporate state.

I freely acknowledge that God has appointed the church to
be the light of the world, the means of spreading the Grospel
and saving the souls of men ; and that the members of the
church ought to be united in this work. But when men speak
of the church in reference to the subject under consideration, we
cannot judge of the truth and propriety of their positions, with-
out knowing exactly what meaning is to be affixed to the word.
What then do you mean by the church 1 Do you use the wofd

1838.] Voluntary Societies. 259

to signify att the followers of Christ on earthy considered as one
body 1 The word sometimes has this sense. But I think you
cannot use it in this sense here. For whatever you may say
as to the duty of the whole body of Christians on earth to act
together in a corporate or united state ; the fact is, that no such
state exists. They are not united and organized as one body,
and of course are not in a capacity to act together as one boay^
to promote any benevolent object. So that if good is not done
in some other way, it will not be done at all. For every one
knows, that any attempt, in the present state of things, to bring
all Christians on earth to act together in any work of benevo-
lence would be abortive.

Do you then use the word church to signify a collection or
congregation of Christians in a particular place ? And when
you say, that the work of benevolence should be undertaken by
the church in its corporate state, as the only public association
of men for benevolent purposes ; do you mean that each local
churchf i. e. each congregation of Christians, should act as a
churchy in accomplishing the work of benevolence ? According
to this plan, every particular church would act by itself, without
any visible connection with others, in disseminating the Scrip-
tures and religious tracts, in raising up ministers, and in sending
the Gospel to the heathen ; that is, every single church would,
to all intents and purposes, be a distinct Bible Society, a Tract
Society, an Eklucation Society, and a Missionary Society. And
this would be the case with every single church belonging to
every denomination of Christians. Each would exert its agency,
and pursue its object in its own way, unconnected with others. —
But this mode of operation would be attended with difficulties
and embarrassments so manifest and so multiplied, that no one
could be found to advocate it.

Will you then use the word church to denote the whole body
of Christians of oneparticular denomination, taken by itself ;
the whole body of Congregationalists, Presbyterians, Baptists^
Episcopalians and Methodbts, living in this and cither kinds?
And when you say ^Ae church must, in every case, undertake
the work of benevolence ; do you mean that each of these
classes or denominations, including all its individual members in
different parts of the world, taken collectively, roust ad together
in undertaking the work, and that nothing must be done tiU they
can be brought to exert a united agency ? But who can be
found that will advocate a mode of operation like this I An

AGO Voluntary Societies. [Oct.

attempt to bring all in different countries, who belong to either
of these classes, to a visible, direct cooperation, would be a very
unwise and hopeless attempt.

Shall then the word church denote the collective body of
Christians of each denominatioriy living in a particular coun-
try 1 And when you say that the church, as such, must do
any work of benevolence, is it your meaning, that all Congre-
gationalists, and all Presbyterians and all Episcopalians in the
United States, as distinct classes of Christians, must act together
in such a work ; and that nothing should be done, till all be-
longing to each particular class, at least a lair majority, shall be
brought to unite ? Few, I apprehend, would argue in favor of
such a principle ; and few good men, duly awake to the objects
of benevolence, with whatever denomination they may be coo-
nected, would hesitate to act on another principle. It will be
recollected that a majority of the General Assembly of the
Presbyterian church, tor several years, refused to organise a
Board of Foreign Missions ; yet Synods, Presbyteries, and indi-
viduals of that denomination, who were in favor of such an or-
ganization, scrupled not to exert themselves in one way and
another in favor of that tiuly christian object. Nor has any
denomination of Christians doubted the propriety of acting in
the same way. If only a part of any denomination, — say Con-
gregationalists or Episcopalians, — are in favor of any great work
of benevolence, shall that part neglect it ? Shall those wbo are
ready to act, lie still, because others are not ready ? How bas it
been with different classes of Christians in Europe and America ?
What has been the commencement of action in the Bible cause,
in the cause of Tracts, Sabbath schools. Foreign Missions and
Temperance ? And ho>\' has each been carried forward ? Let
us look at the history ef benevolent undertakings, both here and
abroad, and receive the instruction it affords.

But I must pursue the inquiry further. Will you then em-
ploy the word church to denote a part of those who belong to
a particular denomination^ Bs the Congregationalists in a par-
ticular State, the Presbyterians in a particular Synod, or the
Episcopalians in a particular diocese? Suppose such a part of
those belonging to a particular class of Christians, are of ooe
heart in favor of some benevolent object. Can any one d<«ubt
the propriety of their uniting their endeavors, on any plan which
they may prefer, to accomplish it? Now if this plan slKxild go
extensively into operation, there would be a distinct orgaoin-

1888.] Voluntary Societies. 261

tion, (io an ecclesiastical form, if you please,) of the Congrega-
tionalists,tbe Baptists, the Episcopalians, etc., in Massachusetts,
in Maine, in Connecticut etc., and of Presbyterians in other
parts, for the whole range of benevolent purposes. Accordingly,
the various benevolent enterprises of the day would be under-
taken, not by the church of Christ in Massachusetts or any
other State^ acting together as one bodyy but by several distinct
parts of it, each part acting independently of the others. Now
if by the church you mean such a portion of one denomination
of Christians, as live in one part of the country ; then these
benevolent enterprises, thus conducted, might be said to be con-
ducted by the church.

But while the mode of proceeding just described might in
present circumstances, be proper ; tliere would be several diffi-
culties not to be overlooked, respecting the manner of treating
the subject. — It would be a manifest impropriety of language
to call a small portion of the whole body of Christians, and a
small portion of a single denomination of Christians, the church
of Christ : — as manifest a solecism, as to call a single town or
county, the nation^ or a single nation, the world. And it is very
questionable, whether the particular portion of Christians, and
the particular portion of one denomination of Christians, above
specified, can be called a church. A church may properly
signify a particular society or congregation of Christians, united
together for the worship of God in one place. But with what

Sropriety can we call the general body of Congregationalists in
lassachusetts, a church 1 And with what propriety can we
call the Presbyterians belonging to one Presbytery or Synod, a
church 1 In truth, the general body of Congregationalists in
Massachusetts cannot be called either a church or the church.
Nor can they be called a Congregational church, or the Con-
gregational church. Nor can the Presbyterians, composing a
Presbytery or Synod, be called either a church or the church, —
or, a Presbyterian church , or the Presbyterian church . The same
as to other denominations. A Congregational, Presbyterian, or
Episcopal church is a body of Christians smaller than what is
here intended ; while the Congregational, Presbyterian, or Epis-
copal church is larger.

Here one difficulty comes up after another. It is said, that
the Scriptures authorize only one public association of men for
benevolent purposesy which t5, the church of Christ ; that this
is the only divine institution^ and the only institution to be used

962 VolwUary Societiei. [Oct.

for the tpread of the Oospdf tte.^ and that any thing wkidk it
added to this, vitiates the church, and dishanarM God. Now
where do we find this one public association of men, this one
divine institution, which is to accomplish every benevdeDt ob-
ject ? Is there any such thing on the hce of the earth ? I do
not ask, whether there should be a body of men answering to
this description ; but whether there if such a body. If it exists,
where is it found ? Where, in any part of the world, or in all
parts together, can you fix your eye upon one public assodatum
of men for benevolent purposes, — one and only one divine isuU-
tution, which is adequate to accomplish every good object ? If
all the followers of Christ were united and organized into one
great, harmonious body, that body surely could be found* But,
it does not exist. And if benevolent objects are not to be ac^
complished, except by thb one public auociaiion of men, they
are not to be accomplished at all.

Is then that one divine institution, that one public aseodeh
turn of men found in each of the different denoounations of
evangelical Christians ? Does the one and the only divine »•-
stitution show itself in the Congregational, the Presbyterian,
the Baptist, the Episcopal denomination, etc. ? If by that one
public association is meant, what would seem to be meant by
ttf the organization of OoiTs people on earth into one visible
body for the accomplishment of his benevolent designs ; then, as
1 have before said, there is no such thing in existence. The fiJ-
lowers of Christ are divided into a great number of parties, each
party organized in a manner different from others, and for the
most part acting separatel v from others, and not unfiequently in
opposition to others. Now is this dividing of the Christian
world into parties, or sects, in accordance with the will of God ?
Is it the divine institution, that there should be, as there actually
is, a multitude of distinct and separate public associations of
Christians, formed on different principles, bearing diflferent names,
having no visible connection with each other, and often acting
against each other ? Is all this according to the word of God?
Far from it. Every sober man must acknowledge that the ex-
istence of these various and dashing -sects is a wide departure
from the precepts and the spirit of Christianity ; that these dif>
ferent and separate associations and denominations of Christians
are institutions devised by man's wisdom, and established by his
authority, in opposition to the authority of God. And yet there
is no other church of Christ on eafth, but what is made up of

1838.] Voluntan/ Societies. 263

these difiereot denominations. What now shall be done ? Shall
the attempt be made to bring all Christians to unite in one body,
one public association ; and shall the attempt be continued till
such a visible union is effected ? And shall we adopt the prin*
ciple, that no great work of love is to be undertaken, till Chris-
tians are thus united, and so fitted to act harmoniously in ac«
complishing the objects of benevolence ? Christians at large
have certainly, by tneir divisions, deviated from the standard of
holy writ, and have thereby involved themselves and the cause
of their Master, in great difficulty. In all this they are verily
guilty before God. But because they have sinned in this mat«
ter, shall they sin in every thing else ? Because they have
left undone tbe duty of maintaining a complete unity among
themselves, shall they leave all other duties undone ? Because
they have disobeyed those divine precepts which require them
all to be one, and which respect them m their associate capa«
city as constituting the kingdom of Christ ; shall they also diso-
bey those precepts which respect them in their individual capa-
citiff and require them to relieve the distressed, to instruct tbe
ignorant, to labor for the spread of the Gospel and the conver-
sion of sinners, and to do good to all men ? And if a smaller or
larger number of individual Christians find that they can unite
together in accomplishing any labor of love to which they are
called by the word of God, and are satisfied that such union
will aid their efforts and contribute to their success ; what shall
hinder them from uniting ? And may not the union and united
action of those who are prepared for it, be among the most
effectual means of bringing about a larger tinton, and of has-
tening the time when Christians every where shall unite and
act together ?

But it may be said, such a union of individual Christians, as
that just mentioned, instead of being a divine institution, is
altogether of man^s devising ; and consequently it cannot be a
fit and lawful means of spreading the gospel, and doing good in
other ways. But is such a union of individual Christians for
benevolent purposes any more a matter of man's devising, than
the union of individual Christians in a distinct and separate
denomination ? And is it any farther firom being a divine
institution ? Why then should it be regarded as less fit for the
accomplishment of the objects of benevolence? I know it may
be saia, that God authorizes Christians to form themselves into
an ecclesiastical body^ a church state j and in that state, to labor

064 Vobmiary Sodeties. [Oct.

for the conversion of sinners and the enlargement of Christ's
kingdom. But does God authorize Christians to tana them-
selves into such ecclesiastical bodies as now exists i. e. distinct
and separate ecclesiastical sects or denominations ? Does not the
Apostle Paul earnestly protest against it ? (See 1 Cor. 3: 1—4,
and many other places,) and is not the existence of such sects
a standing subject of lamentation with all enlightened Christians ?
Much is said against the associations of benevolent individaab
for benevolent purposes, because they are formed vohaUaribf^
in contradistinction to what is expressly of divine appointment.
But are these benevolent associations more voluntary^ and more
in contradistinction to what is expressly of divine appointmeni,
than the combining of Christians into separate sects id an
ecclesiastical form ?

What then is to be done ? Let me ask, what is done, even
by those who contend that every thing should be done by that
one association of men, which the word of God expressly
authorizes, and by no other ? Why, each separate sect or de-
nomination, though existing in that separate state lo
opposition to the divine institution, goes on and acts, as a
ttnct and separate and voluntary association, in accomplishing
every great and good object, and seems not to doubt that all is
right. Yes, even those, who maintain that every thing should
be done by that one public association of men which the
Bible authorizes, act in this way, i. e. by uniting together as
a distinct denomination^ separate from the great body of good
men who constitute the real church of Christ, (a proceeding far
from being authorizecl by the Bible ;) or, when they cannot
bring their whole denomination to unite, they bring a |Mirt of it
to unite ; and with that part, even if it be a small part, they
undertake the business of christian benevolence. 1 do not
mention this to object to it. But it is manifestly m direct
opposition to the principle, that nothing should be done, except
by the one divinely authorized public association of men, the
church of Christ. For plainly, those members of the de-
nomination who are prepared to act together, are not Ae
church of Christ, Nor is the whole denomination the cAnrcfc
of Christ. If you say, they are a part of the church ; — so are
any individual Christians who choose to unite together in doing
good.

To maintain that an ecclesiastical organization is the only one
which can properly prosecute the work of benevolence on a

1838.] Voluntary Societies. S65

large scale, would be attended with tpedal difficulty among the
Congregationalists in Massachusetts, and in other parts of New
England. For, except particular churches, and a lew Consocia-
tions, we have no permanent ecclesiastical organization. And
this want of ecclesiastical organization makes it impracticable
for us to do any thing on a large scale, in an ecclenastical way*
For example : The Congregationalists in Massachusetts cannot
engage in the missionary work ecclesiastically ^ unless the
members of all the churches meet in one great assembly and
act together in sending forth missionaries, or appoint representa-
tives to act in their stead. The first cannot be thought of.
As to the second method, how important soever we may con-
sider an ecclesiastical body, representing the Congregationalbts
in Massachusetts ; yet we have none. The Convention of
Congregational ministers, the Pastoral Association, the General
Association, and the several district Associations, are all clerical
bodies, having no delegates from the churches, and not being
themselves representatives of the churches. The General
Association is indeed a representative body ; but it is merely
clerical, and is made up of delegates from other clerical bodies.
Now suppose we were, at this time, to begin the work of For-
eign Missions, as we did a quarter of a century ago. Should
we call all the churches to come together in one great body ?
Or should we invite them to send delegates to form a Foreign
Missionary Society ? But what if they should refuse ? Besides
on the principle under consideration, who would have a right
to send forth such a call, unless previously authorized by the
churches 7 And if any individuals should venture to do it, might
they not be charged with an unwarrantable assumption of
ecclesiastical power ? Should then the General Association
undertake the work ? But the General Association is not the
church, nor is it a body which represents the church ? It is not
an ecclesiastical, but a clerical body. And if it should do any
thing in the name of the churches, or any thing involving the
churches in any obligation ; would it not be regarded as clerical
usurpation ? Would there, then, be no way to begin the work
of Foreign Missions ? Might not the members of the General
Association, or any other ministers or Christians, in compliance
with the commands of God, engage in the business themselves,
as individuals 1 And might they not propose it to others to join
with them ? Doubtless they might. The members of the
General Association in 1810 actually did this, as a clerical body,
Vol. XII. No. 32. 34

266 VobaUary Societies. [Oct.

without claiming any ecclesiastical power. But they bad coofi-
dence in the churches, on whom the success of their under-
taking depended, and trusted that through the mercy of God,
so good a cause would be patronized. Nor did they trust in
vain. That beginning of the missionary work has been a
plant, which though small at first, has grown up and become a
great tree, the leaves whereof are for the healing of the nations.

Is it said, that those who commenced that important work,
should have postponed it till they had brought the churches to
a readiness to engage in it ? But this might have required long
continued efforts on the part of those who were disposed to be
active in the work. And then, upon the principle of the ob-
jector, how could they with propriety have made these effi>rts,
without having been in any way authorized by the churches ?
And if they had themselves delayed all action in the cause of
missions till they had persuaded the churches to unite in the
work, they might, on this very account have failed of persuading
ihern. For in all probability, the only successjvl appeal to the
churches depended on the actual and vigorous prosecution of
the work of missions, for a timCj by those who were its hearty
and active friends, and on the evidence derived from acJcnawU
edged facts, that it might he prosecuted with success.

If you ask, to whom a missionary, or other voluntary societj,
formed in the usual way, are responsible ? I ask, to whom is an
Association, or Consociation, or Presbytery, or Synod responsi-
ble ? Either of these bodies, undertaking the cause of missions
alone, acts on its own responsibility, except that it is responsible
to the Christian public, and especially to God. But you say,
the Association, Consociation, Presbytery or Synod intrust the
missionary business to a Board of Directors, and that this Board
are responsible to the body which appoints them ? The same is
true in the other case. A missionary society intrust the
business of missions to a Board or Committee ; and this Board
or Committee are responsible to the Society. There is an
equal responsibility in both cases, and created in the same way.
And why are not the interests of the Society equally safe, if
the men who constitute the body, acting as a missionary society,
and the men who are appointed as directors, are equally
fmmerous and equally intelligent, pious and faithful 7 The
circumstance of their acting as members of a clerical or an
ecclesiastical body, cannot give security to the missionary
interest committed to them, unless they are intelligent, trust-
worthy and faithful in their individual capacity.

1838.] VohaUary SocUtiei. 867

In view of the foregoing remarks, I cannot but think, that
those who affirm, that benevolent works shovid be undertaken
by the church of Christy and by that only, in an exact ecclesi^
astical formy wiU find the position difficult, embarrassiog, and
untenable.

Christians are united together in the form of a church, or in
the form of churches, for very obviou$ and important purposes ;
and this cliurch form is evidently adapted to accomplish these
purposes. And why may not Christians be united in other
forms for other important purposes ? And why may not other
forms of union be best adapted to accomplish these other pur-
poses ? Is it not so in our civil state ? Our being united together
as Towns, Counties, States, and a nation, is manifestly suited
to various important purposes ; but not to aU purposes. For
weighty reasons we judge it best to form other associations for
literary, charitable, agricultural, mercantile, and moral objects.
An attempt to accomplish all these by acting as Towns,
Counties, etc. would embarrass and shackle all our movements,
and end in disappointment.

It may be said, that, if Towns, Counties, States, and the
nation were what they should be and acted as they ought, in
the capacity of civil corporations, they would be competent to
do all that could be done in promoting every good object.
Now, although this is not perfectly evident, I will admit it.
But these civil bodies are not what they should be. And the

Siestion is, can every important design be carried into effect by
eir agency, they being what they are 1 Is there no occasion
for other Associations ? And may not other Associations be
better adapted, than those above mentioned, to various im«
portant objects ? And if the laws of the land should prohibit aU
other Associations of men, and require that every thing should
be done by these civil bodies, would it not cramp the active
spirit of the community, and hinder their useful exertions ? Is it
not generally by the genius and enterprise of individuaUy
sometimes acting by themselves, but more commonly forming
themselves into smaller or larger associations, that the com-
munity at large is advanced in the useful arts and sciences, and
in all social and][civil advantages ? And why may not the same
hold in respect to the objects of Christian benevolence ?
Church organization is a divine institution, and is suited to
various and momentous purposes. And say, if you please, that

S68 Vohmiary Sodeties. [Oct.

if the church at large were what it should be, it is suited, in its
appropriate organization as a church, to all important pur-
poses. But the church is so far from what it should be, — ^it is
80 divided into sects and parties, in which there b so little
holiness and so much sin, that it is by no means suited, in its
present state, to the various objects of benevolence. You can-
not bring the whole church on earth to act together as one
organized body, in disseminating the Bible, or in sending the
Gospel to the heathen. And you may not be able at once to
bring all who belong to a particular denomination, or any con-
siderable part of them, to act together in such a work, in an
ecclesiastical way» Will you therefore do nothing? If you
have a little company of fifty or a hundred, who are of the
same mind with you ; will you lie still because others are of a
different mind ? Will you extinguish the benevolence and zeal
which God has kindled up in your breast, and deprive the
world of the benefit of its influence, and hinder the accomplish-
ment of that great work of love, which may be accomplished,
if you, with a few others, will resolutely commence it, and move
Others by your example ?

As to the Congregationalists in Massachusetts and other
parts of New England, to whom 1 have already referred, — if
they act at all, they must act in a way correspondent with their
condition* But you may say, they should forthwith change
their condition, and put themselves into an ecclesiastical state,
suited to the great objects of benevolence which are now
presented before them ? Suppose then this change to be de-
sirable, and suppose it to be practicable too, in consistency with
Congregational principles ; as would appear from the ecclesias-
tical state of Connecticut. Still while Congregationalists in
Massachusetts retain their present opinions, as they have a right
to do, on the subject of church government, the proposed
change cannot take place. Must we then abstain from all
effi>rts to evangelize the heathen ? And if our present ecclesias-
tical state is to remain for generations to come, must we, through
all those generations, still do nothing for the conversion of the
heathen ? Because we are not prepared to act in the way
which you think to be the best, shall we not act at all ? And, to
go where they have a settled ecclesiastical organization ; be-
cause ti)e clergy and people of the church of England are not
disposed, as 0 church, to engage in the missionary work ; shall

1838.] Voluntary Societies. 269

those who are disposed, do nothing? If men of a missionary spirit
belonging to the church of England, and those belonging to the
church of Scotland, and if men of such a spirit among the Dis-
senters in Great Britain, and in New England, had acted on this
principle, where would have been all those benevolent institu-
tions which have been originated there and here, and which have
not only been successful in accomplishing the object directly
aimed at, but have awakened the spirit of Christian compassion
and love in the minds of multitudes who stood aloof, and induced
them to enlist heartily in the same work ? From the beginning of
these benevolent operations, it has been constantly affirmed and
demonstrated to be the duty of the whole Christian church,
and of all particular, local churches, and of all denominations
and classes of Christians, to send the Gospel to the heathen.
But nominal Christians generally have been lamentably remiss
in regard to this duty ; and there has been only a comparatively
small number in different parts of Christendom who have
cordially given themselves to the work. This small number of
faithful ministers and Christians have not been able to do what
they would ; but they have done what they could. They
would have rejoiced to see all Christians on earth, of all de-
nominations united in this work, and laboring as subjects of the
same glorious Lord and King, to extend his peaceful reign over
the whole world. But as this could not be, they had no
alternative left, but to abandon the work altogether, or to bring
as many as they found like-minded, to shake off their slumbers,
and in good earnest to join with them in beginning this long-
neglected work. Thanks to God that they determined upon
this course ; and with what wisdom, zeal and success they
have pursued it, the world knows.

Now let it be remembered, that the Congregationalists could
not, to this day, have done any thing, as an ecclesiastical body i
for they have not been formed in such a body. And we know
too that the majority of the General Assembly of the Presby-
terian Church have not till recently undertaken the work of
Foreign Missions ; and probably would not have done it now,,
had not smaller portions of that church commenced it before.
And even now, the church of England at large is very far from
being prepared to engage in the missionary enterprise.

I roust therefore proceed to say, that it is evidently expedient,
and of great importance, to leave the door open for different
modes of action tn promoting the objects of benevolence. To

370 Voluntary Societie$*. [Oct.

maintain, that every thing which b to be done Ibrreformiog and
saving the world, must be done in one and the same way ; and
to regard whatever is done in any other way, with dissatisfaction
or indifference, would in my view betray a very narrow way of
thinking, and a disposition to oppose the manifest leadings of
divine providence. The great Apostle showed himself to be
of a very different mind from this, when, looking at the preach-
ing of Christ by men of difierent characters, and some oi them
very unfriendly to himself, he expressed the feelings of his
heart in these remarkable words : " Notwithstanding, every
way, whether in pretence or in truth, Christ is preached ; and
I therein do rejoice, yea, and I wUl rejoice." Noble spirit !
worthy to be imitated by all who preach the same gospel, and
serve the same divine Master ! To attempt to bring Christians
of every denomination, and in all circumstances, to think and
act in the same way in regard to the objects of benevolence,
would be as fruitless, as to attempt to bring them all to think
alike respecting church government, and the outward forms of
worship. The state of Christendom is far from what it should
be ; and many evils exist which cannot at present be remedied.
Let us employ our talents upon objects which are of the
greatest importance, and which we may have some prospect of
accomplishing. Let us do all the good we can in present
circumstances. And as we cannot induce all Christians to do
good in the way which we prefer, let us be willing they should
do good in their own way. And though we may imagine that
more good would be done, if they should all adopt our way ;
still let us rejoice that they do a less degree of good, rather than
none. We may think it best that all effi>rts in the cause of
benevolence should be made by an ecclesiastical organization ;
or we may think they should be made by voluntary associations.
But whether we prefer the one, or the other, many Christians
will differ from us, and will act, if they act at all, in another
way. Why should we oppose them? Why be disquieted,
provided they allow us the same liberty which they ask for
themselves? Why not say in the spirit of the Apostle: Not-^
withstanding, every way, whether by an eccletiastical or a vol-
untaiy organization^ the glad tidings are proclaimed to the
perishing ; and we therein do rqoice, yea, and we toiU ryoice*
We cannot govern the world. We cannot control the judg-
ments and wills of our fellow Christians. And God has not
called us to do it. Let us give it up, and that cheerfully

1838.] Vobmtary Societies. 871

and kindly. Far away from us be all contracted views,
all jealousy, envy, unholy emulation, and party-spirit. Let us
look with candor and forbearance, and with sincere, expansive
benevolence, upon all who differ from us. Let our desire
for the conversion of the heathen and the increase of the
church be so strong, that we shall heartily rejoice in it, whether
accomplished by our own labors, or the labors of others.
When those of one denomination make report of the good
which, through the blessing of God, they have accomplished ;
kt themy with equal gratitude^ mention the good which other
denominations have accomplished. When those who prefer
voluntary movements, make report of their success ; let them be
sure to notice also the success of those who prefer to act in an
ecclesiastical way. And let those who prefer this way, never
forget to notice what is done by those who prefer the other
way. Oh ! it is enough to make our hearts swell with joy, to
think of the full exercise of this spirit of mutual candor, and
mutual justice, and hearty good-will, among the different classes
of Christians ! This excellent spirit has begun to show itself ia
our country. May its happy influence pervade all our hearts,
and all our public and private transactions. If we would con-
form to the precepts of our religion — if we would prevent
bitterness and strife and envy and evil speaking — if we would
shine as lights in the world, and be successful in promoting the
welfare of Christ's kingdom ; let us cherish this candid, im-
partial, kind, generous disposition, and endeavor to diffuse it
among our fellow Christians. And if the case requires, lei
some portion of the zeal, which we have laid out in opposing
those good men who differ from us, be henceforth laid out in
correcting our own faults, and in cultivating this benevolent,
Cbristlike spirit towards the followers of Christ of every name
and every party.

To those who are advocates for one mode of doing good in
preference to other modes, let me say ; — Brethren, why should
there be any strife ? Ought we not to grant to others the same
rights, as we claim for ourselves, — ^the rights of conscience, and
fi«e agency ? We may think it strange that our arguments do
not convince our brethren; and they may think it equally
strange, that their arguments do not convince us. Perhaps we
may charge thiem with prejudice. And is it not possible that
we may be chargeable with the same ? Are we not liable to

272 Voluntary Societies. [Oct.

some improper bias? Have we never erred in judgment?
And may we not hereafter discover some error in our present
views ?

There are not a few men of sincere benevolence and integ-
rity, who are afraid to admit the principle of Voluntary Associa-
tioos, because indiscreet, extravagant, or ambitious men have
made use of it to sanction disorderly and pernicious measures.
The principle, 1 allow, may be abused, and be made the occa-
sion of great evil. And so may the principle of ecclesiastical
organization. If the argument is valid against one, it is so
against the other. Let all the error, superstition, despotisni»
persecution, and cruelty, which have been found in ecclesiasti-
cal bodies, and have been promoted and acted out by them, and
by their authorized ministers, be fairly set forth ; and would not
the amount of the evil be fearfully great ? Would it not far ex-
ceed that which has resulted ux>m Voluntary Associations?
What then ? Is the abuse or perversion of a thing any aigu-
ment against the thing itself? By no means. It is indeed true,
that the experience we have had of the evils resulting from the
abuse of any just and important principle, should excite us to
exercise all possible diligence and cai'e in order to guard against
such abuse in future ; but it is no reason for abandoning the
principle itself. As to the subject now before us ; instead of
setting ourselves in opposition to the principle of Voluntary As-
sociations,— a principle which is in itself blameless, and which
has been productive of immense good, and is, in some circum-
stances, indispensable to the welfare of the church ; — instead of
setting ourselves in opposition to this principle, let us employ
all the wisdom we have acquired to give it a right direction, and
to prevent its being turned to a bad use by heated, reckless, or
unprincipled men. This is our proper business at the present
day. And in this important business it is hoped that ministers
and Christians will act with moro and more union and zeal. A
little more of this union and zeal, added to a disposition to profit
by experience, and the great end is secured, — the order of the
church and the interests of pure religion are safe, without break-
ing in upon a principle, which has been and still may be pro-
ductive of so much good.

But here one caution is required. We have seen and de-
plored the abuse of the ^^ Voluntary Principle," in some instan-
ces, and the disorder and desolation which have followed in its
train. In consequence of this, are we not in danger of disre-

1838.] Vobmiary Societies. 973

carding the immeasumble benefits which the principle has pro*
duced ? The good which has been accomplished by Voluntary
Societies in the various departments of Christian benevolence,
ought to be remembered with the most devout gratitude. The
events which have given distinction and glory to the last fifty
years, and for which continual thanks are ofiered up to God, by
innumerable multitudes in the four quarters of the globe— these
blessed events have, for the most part, been brought about by
the agency of Voluntary Societies. Now would it not betray
an unbecoming state of mind in us, if we should be so absorbed
with the contemplation of the evils which, in some instances,
have been occasioned by the perversion of the Voluntary Prin-
ciple, as to lose sight of the great amount of good which has
been efiected by its legitimate action ? Better err on the other
side ; — ^better be so absorbed with the contemplation of the im-
measurable good, as to lose sight of the evil which has come in.
But it is best of all to avoid error on both sides ;— -on one side
to notice the whole extent of good, and duly to estimate its
value ; and on the other side, to keep a watchful eye upon the
evils which have stolen in upon us through the folly or rashness
of men, and to adopt the most wise and energetic measures to
remove them, and to shut the door against their occurrence in
future. But at the present day are there not faults apparent
on both sides ? Do we not find men who celebrate the happy re-
sults of Voluntary Societies, with incessant raptures, — ^who
speak of them as though they were in no case mingled with any
portion of evil, and who seem to see nothing but unqualified and
unbounded good ? On the other hand, do we not find those,
who keep so vigilant and jealous an eye upon the evils result-
ing from the occasional perversk>n of what is in itself right, and
who are so alarmed at the appearance of danger, that they do
really lose sight of the vast amount of good which has been
done ; or, if they see it at all, see it as though they saw it not ?
Unquestionably, there is something true and something false,
something useful and something hurtful on both sides. Happy
they, who hold fast what is true and useful, and rid themselves
of what is false and hurtful.

Finally : Let none who love the cause of Christ, be in haste
to innovate upon the common methods of benevolent action. I
urge it as a reason for this caution, that the evils of sudden m-
novation, even when the change proposed is in itself important,
firequently prove more than an overbalance for all the benefits

Vol. XII. No. 32. 35

974 Voluntary Societies. [0<:t.

resulting from it. Various benevolent institutions in New Eng-
land and in other parts of the country,— our Missionary Sode-
ties, Domestic and Foreign, our Bible, Tract, Education and
Temperance Societies, and our Associations for establishing and
supporting Literary and Theological Seminaries, have been in
successful operation for a considerable length of time. Now to
new-model these institutions, so as to bring them directly under
the control of the church at large, or of any particular eccle^as-
tical bodies, would be a work of a very serious nature, and of
very difficult accomplishment. And certainly, such a work
should not be entered upon in haste. In these great cooceniSy
it is of the highest moment that rash and perilous attempts at
innovation should be avoided. Even if our various institudoos,
in their present state, are liable to some exceptions, and if the
love of preeminence, or party spirit, or indiscreet zeal may take
occasion from them to introduce pernicious irregularities ; still
there is urgent reason to be cautious, and to guard watchfiilly
against the mischiefs that would be likely to result from sudden
charges. This all sober men acknowledge to be of vast conse-
quence in regard to civil institutions. And why is it not of
equal consequence in regard to charitable institutions, especially
those which have been long established and extensively patron-
ized, and which, by the wisdom of their measures, and by the
success which has attended them, have secured the confidence
of the public ? If the Episcopalians, and Presbyterians, and
Methodists in our country, who have a settled ecclesiastical
organization, are in whole or in part, disposed to carry on their
benevolent operations in an ecclesiastical form ; we will be so
far from throwing any obstacles in their way, that we will roost
gladly do all in our power to contribute to their success by our
good wishes and by every act of fraternal kindness, only asking
that they would not interfere with the liberty of others. But
before attempting any material changes in those benevolent
institutions which have been established on the Voluntary Princi-
ple, and have been long in successful operation, it should well
be ascertained, that there are important evils which attend our
benevolent institutiofis^ or result from them^ in their present
form^ and that these evils are the genuine fruit of what is pe-
culiar in the present scheme of action. It should also be as-
certained, that neither these evils, nor others of equal magm-
tudcj would be likely to result from the other schemCy which is
proposed to come in place of the present. If, after careful and

1838.] Voluntarjf SodeHu. S75

patient and repeated coosideration, it shall be found expedient
that an important change should take place in the plan of our
benevolent societies — a change which will bring them directl^
under the supervision of ecclesiastical bodies ; let the change
be attempted with such kindness and gentleness, and be
carried into efiect with such moderation and judgment, that
no rupture or collision shall take place among brethren,
and no wound inflicted on the feelings of the Christian
community, and what is of paramount importance, that no check
be given to benevolent feeling and benevolent action, and no
obstacle cast in the way of the conversion of the world. If
there are sufficient reasons for changes in our mode of doing
good ; intelligent and pious men can certainly understand
those reasons, and in due time, be prepared unitedly to adopt any
changes which promise to advance the welfare of the church.
And be it remembered, as a principle of primary consequence,
though at the present time^ most grievously neglected, that
men of stmt toill be mitch sooner convinced by sober and
wtighty arguments, than by empty dtclamation and sophistry ,
and more easily persuaded by Ictnaness and gentleness, than by
wrath and violence. If we apprehend, (I speak in the name ot
those who have such an apprehension,) — if we apprehend thai
serious evils will result from the present plan of operation, and
that valuable improvements may be made ; let us with great
sincerity and frankness, but with modesty, communicate our
views to others, and let the matter be well considered and
weighed ; and let no attempt be made to introduce a change,,
before the way is prepared for it. And it will not unfrequently
be found that, even after the subject has been some time before*
the public, the safest, and most effectual way, yea, the only
way, to bring about an important change is, to introduce it by^

farts, a little now, and a little more by and by ; as the British
Parliament have done. This tends to prevent alarm and the
burst of excited passion, diminishes the force of opposition, and
begets quietness and confidence. It is especially important,
not only as a matter of practical wisdom, but as a Christian*
duty, to keep at a great distance from all bitter or harsh re-
flections upon those who are not convinced by oup arguments
and who adhere strongly to the plan oS action to which they
have been used. Invincible reluctance to change, is not among
the worst things in human nature. Nay, it often results from
the most praise^worthy principle^ And though, we may think

S76 Authority, a Source of [Oct.

it exists in a very faulty degree, and though it may oocaaon us
trouble, and may stand in the way of the accomplishmeot of
our favorite ohiects ; we should still treat it with the utmost
forbearance and lenity. And if, after all our appeals to reason,
benevolence, and piety, we are not so happy as to find, that the
time has come, when the proposed changes can be peaceably
and harmoniously efiected; then, instead of giving way to
fretfulness or sourness of temper, let us cherish feelings of per-
fect good-nature. And as others may not be so pliable as we
wish, and may not bend to the new plan of benevolent actioD,
which we should prefer, let us learn to be pliable ourselves^
and quietly go along with them a while longer, in the old way,
(bus avoiding the evils of division and strife, and keeping the
unity of spirit in the bond of peace.

ARTICLE II.

AtTTHORITT, A SoURCB OF MoRAI* OBLIGATION.
Bf Rav. L. P. Biekok, Prof, of Didaotie Tbeolofy, Wartara BaawTt Ooltefa, OUob

A PBEV AILING spirit of insubordinatiou to law fearfully char-
acterizes the present day. It is evinced in the thousand indi-
vidual cases where inclination, ambition and interest trample
upon authority — in the frequent appeals to a false code of hon-
or— in the frenzy and corruption oi contested elections — in the
violent assumption of law by reckless men into their own hands,
and wreaking private hate by a tumultuous and summary ven-
geance— and in the excited commotions of a collected and fran-
tic populace, rushing like a tempest over all law to its object
amid scenes of riot, conflagration and blood. Yea, in addition
to the licentiousness openly advocated by some shameless lec-
turers both male and female, there are not wanting instances
where the influence of a christian name and profession is direct-
ly applied to the dissemination of principles which sap the foun-
dations of all authority, and prostrate the salutary restraints of
civil legislation. AH witness the prevalence of this disorganiz-
ing spirit, and all the wise and good deplore it.

Perhaps this result was to have been expected from the pro-

1838.] Moral Ol^iUian. 277

fress of free principles, and the operation of a free government,
t IS human nature to take extremes, and thus it might have
been anticipated that many minds, when loosed from the point
of passive obedience, would swing over to the opposite point of
licentious indulgence* But if from the nature oi man such an
anticipation were rational, it by no means diminishes the dan-
ger from the fact itself. There can be no safety in leaving
this spirit to its unhindered action, and permitting it to move on
to its certain issue, with no vigorous effi>rts in counteraction.
The Repository, it is true, is not the proper medium for reach-
ing the great mass of dtsorganizers and levelers, still in the
higher and purer atmosphere where it moves, it is not to be
presumed that there are none, who, if they do not directly throw
all their influence against the majesty and authority of law, are
yet entirely prevented, and from confused or perverted views
absolutely disqualified, from standing out its firm supporters and
defenders. A thorough, honest and serious discussion of the
subject in these pages can hardly fail to subserve the interests
of patriotism, philanthropy and religion. The present Article
b designed as a small contribution to thb object.

Conscience may be reached, and a sense of obligation awa*
kened from two sources, — the nature ofthingSf and, authority.
Thejirst is by a direct intuition of right, or a reflective percep-
tion of expediency, in things themselves — ^the second is by the
legislation of a sovereign enactment. One has the approbation
or remorse of natural conscience for its sanctions, the other has
the additional retributions of positive rewards and punishments.
Both have a direct appeal to the ultimate principle of right—*
the Jiret J to the rightness of the precepts — ^the secondy to the
rightness of the authority. Both lay inviolate obligations upon
conscience, but from two distinct sources. One insisting, thus
saith nature — the other, thus saith law* One inquires, How
reasonest thou ? — the other. How readest thou ?

The present design includes the latter only, and accordingly
we will consider to some extent the nature of authority as a
source of human obligation*

Two inquiries will cover the ground we propose to occupy,
viz.

I. Why is authority necessary as a source of obligation 1
n. What is the test of legitimate authority 1
The necessity of authority in the direction of human conduct
is the main point of controversy. It is strenuously denied that

978 AuAorUtfy a Souru of [Oct.

there is any necessity for it in the government of man. Law
has no claims to obedience for its own sake. Man is fully oom-
petent from his own reason for all the purposes of self-govern-
ment as a member of civil society, and thus all authority k at
the best superfluous. If it require what the man does not ap-
prove, it is tyranny ; if it require only what he does approve, it
is useless. All that man needs is instruction, not ^tbority ; he
must be convinced, not commanded.

From this general assumption (originate a variety of diflfereot-
ly modified theories. One affirms that pleasure or happiness
is the only good, and this is found in the gratification of hb con^
stitutional susceptibilities, and thus while it is right to fidlow
natural appetite, this too is a sufficient directory. Gntify il
when it craves, and stop when it is satiated. Another, on the
same principle that pleasure is the only good, admits that a
wakeful discretion is necessary, lest its possession be more than
counterbalanced by subsequent suflfering. But it is earnestly
asserted that every man's own Acuities are abundantly compe-
tent to make the estimate and guide the conduct. Another
would so cultivate the social sympathies and natural sensibilities
that they shall preserve the order and peace of society. An-
other assumes that a proper appeal to man's natural sense of
justice and reciprocal rights, and especially to the feelings of
kindness and benevolence are sufficient for all the purposes of
social regulation without any positive enactments — and stiU an-
other, more elevated in its conception and plausible in its argu-
mentation, asserts that man is endowed with reason which can-
not but be in conformity with universal truth, and all right le-
gislation therefore must be in harmony with it. Obedience to
all law will thus exactly coincide with the dictates of pure reason
in each individual, and render him the most fi'ee when he is the
most obedient.

All these, however, from the more refined and elevated sys-
tem of Jean Jacques Rousseau's social contract, down to the
gross and insane schemes of Robert Dale Owen and Frances
Wright Darismont, involve as fundamental, the principle that
man is singly competent to all the purposes of self-government
as a member of civil society, and that he needs nothing and
should yield obedience to nothing but the law of his own nature
within him. All authority in accordance with this law of na-
ture* is superfluous, and all that transcends it partakes of the veiy
essence of tyranny, and is to be unconquerably resisted. Han

1838.] Moral OUigaiion. 279

has the right to judge all law and hold himself absolved from
allegiance to all authority which does not square with his uner-
ring convictions. All authority is thus completely and forever
nullified, for when the precept is obeyed it is never to be be-
cause it was commanded, but simply because it was seen to be
rational. It is not authority which is to fasten obligation upon
the conscience, but the perceived conformity to the nature of
things.

It cannot be denied that many theories which lead to the
above conclusion are made to assume a very plausible appear-
ance, and are supported by very specious arguments, m the-
ory can gain footing in the world and embody among its advo^
cates a large number of confessedly learned and ingenious minds,
without involving much truth, and thb so skilfully inwrought
that it may hold the system together for a time in spite of the
dangerous and perhaps faul errors which are included within it.
This is peculiarly true with the subject before us. It is a prin*
ciple fundamental to all moral freedom and responsibility, which
we are to yield only with life, that nothing shall be allowed to
intermeddle vnth conscience. Its rights are sacred, and no
authority from heaven or earth can release from its hallowed
obligations. Nothing can bind to obedience in opposition to the
clear perception of intuitive right. These immutable truths are
applied in various forms to the foregoing schemes, and the ef-
forts to sunder the bonds of all authority is made, by a perver-
sion of the most stable principles in moral science. And truly
if the claims of positive law cannot be sustained without sub-
verting the rights of conscience, if the obligations of authority
cannot be upheld but at such a sacrifice, then let every sceptre
fail and every throne crumble. Sooner shall heaven and earth
pass away, than one jot or tittle of this law, written upon every
man's bosom by God's own finger, shall be erased. But no
such sacrifice is demanded. The majesty and authority of law
stands firm in perfect harmony with these immutable principles.
All truth is one, and all its parts in everlasting consistency.
A comprehensive view of the subject before us wiU most surely
disclose that the same principles which have been used to nulli-
fy all authority as loraing it over conscience, demand unquali-
fied submission to legitimate authority as the rightful lord and
sovereign of conscience. It is here emphatically true, that

"Shallow draughts intoxicate the brain,
But drinking largely sobers us again."

S80 Authority, a Source of [Oct.

Tv^o general coosidentioDS will suffice to prove the neeetntj
of authority as a source of moral obligation.

1. There* are many purposes essential to the govenmunt of
society y which cannot be gained by leaning numkind to the tgw-
rate decisions of each one^s intuitive or reflective pereeptioiu

In some things, right is seen by intuition, and obligatioo at
once felt. In other things, duty is found only by a patieot ex-
amination of circumstances and comparison of piobabilides, and
thus by reflection the course of duty is seen from the best esti-
mate of practical expediency. And now we say, that if all meo
be left separately to 6nd each his own duty from either or both
of the above sources, there are many purposes essential to the
government of man which can never be accomplished.

Even in matters of obligation originating in an intuitive per-
ception of right in the nature of things, it is certain that sodelj
could not be kept together, if there were no umpire higher than
•each man's own intuition. For admit that th'is is the same io
kind in all men, and that so far as they see the right, they do
and must see it alike, yet it is not and never will be true that all
will have the power of intuition equally developed, nor kept
equally pure from the perverting influence of sense. Soooe
principles of action absolutely essential to the welfare of society
will not be seen at all by multitudes— others wiU be seen only
indistinctly and of course confusedly by the great mass of oom-
TOon minds — and even the strongest intellects, in whom the
pure reason is the most clear and calm, will be conscious that
-they stand only upon the shore of the great ocean of troth,
which is every where casting up its treasures from depths which
they cannot fathom, and over a region wider than they can ex-
plore. How then, on these subjects of intuition are we to
hring the consciences of men together, and bind them hanno-
•niously with the same obligations ? Take as an illustratioo one
fact in the divine government, applicable to many others essen-
tial to the well being of any system of moral agents, viz., the
obligation that " all men should honor the Son even as tbej
honor the Father." This has its ground in the nature of tte
divine existence in Trinity, and to the all-perfect mind is seen
by intuition. But if it depended upon our mtuitive perceptions,
when would men recognize this obligation ? Both on man and
angel the obligation rests, and can rest, upon mere authority
only. It is a service which is due to the second Person in the
Trinity, but no mind unable to fathom the depths of God's

1838.] Moral Obligatian. S81

mysterious existence, can bring up this truth and settle the ob*
ligation upon the foundation of its own rigbtness in the nature of
things. God must say to man — " this is my Beloved Son, hear
him" — and to the high intelligences of lieaven — " when he
bringeth his only begotten Son into the world, let all the angels
of God worship him" — and thus the obligation is fixed upon the
conscience of man and angel forever. They cannot settle the
rigbtness of that command upon its own nature, they see only
the Tightness of the authority which gives it, and which guards
it by the awful sanction of " Anathema Maranatha," if it be dis-
obeyed ; and this is sufficient. The authority binds the con-
science. The mouth of the rebel against this authority will be
as effectually sealed in the judgment, as if he had disobeyed
after his reason had comprehended the whole ground of the
conrunandment.

This is but one example in the divine government, which
may apply in illustration to many cases in all governments.
The conscience must often be bound where there can be no in-
tuition of the ground and nature of the principle. Children are
to be governed — ignorant adults, barely awake to the conscious-
ness of their moral identity, are to be brought under obligation— *
Yea, men of the highest intelligence, and even angels and arch-
angels must sometimes be commissioned on errands of duty,
where authority alone is the only source from which the con-
science can be reached.

And if this be true in oases where right and wrong are the
objects of intuitiany how much more so when the duty can be
settled only by patient reflection 1 How much more certainly
will the minds of men be divided on those subjects of obligation
which grow out of general expediency and propriety ? A great
proportion of social duties lie altogether in this field. They de-
pend upon circumstances. They are to be regulated by gen-
eral interests, and though it be granted that one side must al-
ways have weightier reasons for its adoption than the other, yet
how in the multitude of human prejudices and interests will you
harmonize the action of society in relation to them ? What but
some legitimate source of authority can come in here, and fix
the line for the regulation of human practice ?

There are moreover many particulars, for which there is no
definite foundation in the nature of things. They involve practi-
cal questions that must be settled in some way, and in which
there must also be uniformity of practice, but they have nothing

Vol. XII. No. 32. 36

282 Authority J a Source of [Oct

in their own nature by which they can be precisely settled.
Positive enactments — sovereign authority alone is competent to
fix the rule and bind the subject to it. On this ground stand
very many duties both religious and civil. What in the nature
of things could Adam see for the prohibition of the fruits of one
tree alone in Paradise ? What in the nature of things could be
seen to fix the duties of circumcision and the Mosaic purifications?
or under the present dispensation, the ordinance of baptism, and
the elements of bread and wine in the sacramental sopper?
Grant that in their adaptation to the ends they were designed
to subserve, there is a perceived propriety and fitness. Yet
who can so distinguish these from all other things which might
subserve the same ends, as a priori to say, from the mere na-
ture of the things themselves, these and nothing but these ougbc
to have been selected and observed ?

Again, what in the nature of things could have bonnd the
conscience of Abraham to '^ Get him out of his country, and
from his kindred, and from his father's house, unto a land that
God would show him ?" or more emphatically still, what in the
nature of things could have fixed the obligation of obedience to
''take now thy son, thine only son Isaac whom thoulovest, and
get thee into the land of Moriah and ofier him there for a burnt
offering ?" Could the intuitions of reason find here any founda-
tion on which to rest the claims of obligation ? Over aU this
region reason is like the dove of the deluge, there is no place
\%'here she can rest. She can only look away to the authority
which commands — and which is but fleeing back to the ark she
left — ^before she can find a place for the soul of her foot. In
the rightness of the authority alone can reason see here any
ground of obligation.

So in relation to human society, a great proportion of its
regulations are those for which there is no exclusive reason in
the nature of things. At what age precisely shall minority
cease, and the youth take the place of a man in civil relations?
When shall the right of suffrage be granted, and to whom ?
When eligible to office ? What is the manner of election, and
induction, and how long retain office ? How shall property be
transferred and inherited? How shall contracts be rendered
valid, and what seals shall be applied ? What shall be the form
of judicial oaths, and of all judicial and legislative proceedings ?
A thousand queries of this nature may be put, and what will
you do ? Wait till individual reason or reflection settles them,

1838.] Moral ObUgatum. 283

or let every man do what is right in his own eyes in regard to
them ? Can society exist where these questions are undecided ?
No, they must be settled, and you can possihly resort to no
other source but simple authority to accomplish it. And when
the authority which decides here is legitimate, no man's con-
science needs any thing further. The law of his nature binds
him in obedience to it just as decisively as if he had all the
grounds of obligation beneath his own intuition.

2. It is necessary to the preservation of society that there be
additional sanctions to natural obligation. The sanctions of
natural obligation are the sensations of conscience in view of
past actions-— complacency for doing right, and compunction for
doing wrong. To this may be added the natural consequences
of our conduct in the relation of cause and effect. And now
even if society could commence with all the advantages of
general intelligence and complete holiness, it cannot be provei)
that these sanctions of natural obligation alone would be suffi*
cient thus to perpetuate it. All probability is against it.
Temptation would be present — a thousand occasions to sin
would occur, nor is there the probability that with nothing but
natural consequences to follow from the sin, it would in all cases
be resisted. The increase of capacity and strength of faculties
in the individual and those by whom he was suiTounded, and
over whom he might exert an influence and gain an ascendency
would constantly augment the dangers of pride, ambition, and
love of domination. And were there no other barriers than
natural conscience, who can believe that they would avail to
secure universal obedience ? And if sin once entered, there
could be no safety to the community. Speedy destruction to
the system would be the inevitable issue of its own perverted
action. Natural conscience was the only balance-wheel, and
when that, too weak to retain its own position or regulate the
movements of the different parts, is thrown from its centre, the
whole machinery must be rent asunder from its own violence.

All that we can gather from facts enforces this conclusion.
Man in his original innocence sinned. Holy angels also sinned
even when in both cases positive punishment was added to the
sanctions of natural conscience. How much more certain the
existence of sin when the restraining influence of all positive
authority is absent ? No one can say, that if God should lay
aside all authority in heaven, and leave the angels of light to
nothing but the operation of natural obligation, they would

284 Authority^ a Source of [Oct.

be kept from mingling with hell for a »ngle day. All proba*
bility is that sin would soon enter and rage unrestrained, if God
withdraw all the influence of heaven but the simple workings
of each one's own conscience. All created beings were made
for law. From their very nature they require the influence of
positive enactments and sanctions. If the force of authority be
removed, they are at once unnaturalized, unorganized, and the
society which they constitute must fall in ruins. Tlie very
thought of anarchy is dreadful to every finite mind which
allows itself any serious reflection.

If this would follow in a world of primitive obedience, more
certainly would destruction ensue to a system in which the
principles of depravity were already acting. Take away all
positive retribution from vice and crime, and what security re-
mains but that each one must lie at the mercy of the strongest?
The bloody days of Danton and Robespierre would come again,
and earth and heaven be robed in sackloth. The race would
fail from the eaith ; society could not hold together for one
generation. The only safety possible would be in throwing the
nation back into its elements, and each one fleeing from his
fellows to perpetual solitude, where no law is needed but that
which lays its obligations upon one individual. Society among
men exists, and can be maintained only by superadding the
sanctions of positive authority to natural obligation. To this we
owe all the blessings which social life has ever imparted. This
additional influence is necessary. And in various ways it is af-
forded by the interposition of positive legislation. It gives
distinctness and definiteness to duty, by an explicit and peremp-
tory annunciation of the precepts — it adds the sanction of
positive rewards and punishments — it gives vitality and person-
ality to law in the recognition of a living present sovereign — it
augments obligation by the exhibition of the lawgiver's own
moral character, wishes and sympathies — ^and finally, it prevents
all evasion of penalty through the stifling of conscience, by the
consciousness that there is a personal agency in another, whose
interest as well as duty it is to arraign, convict, condemn and
execute.

Authority is thus essential to the well being of creatures.
The sceptre must be held over the head of every rational being,
with the sole exception of the Great Supreme and Sovereign
Lord of all. But more especially for man. He was made for
society. All his natural endowments bespeak the design of a

1838.] Moral Obligaium. 885

social existence, and urge him to a communion with his species.
He cannot be happy in bolated seclusion. The elements of
society are separate individuals it is true, but it is a delusion to
suppose that they ever existed in solitude. It is but the dream
of theorizers, to talk of the organization of civil government by
a congregating of separate individuals from all points of the
compass, who have left each his solitary cave and come up in
bis savage wildness to enter into a compact that he will wear
clothes, obey laws, and become a civilized and social being.
Man never otherwise existed than in society, and as a member
of society he must be governed by law, and live submissively
under rightfijl authority. Every influence which goes to weak-
en the force of law, or strengthen the opinion that man does
not need it, is a blow directly at the very vitals of human
happiness. It is as foul a treason against the rights of society
as is the effort to pervert the principles of natural morality.
The moment that legitimate authority is subverted, there is no
security for earth or Heaven. Gratifying to the pride of human
independence as it may be, to rise above all authority, and obey
no law but that which is self-imposed, yet, like every other mad
presumption of self-sufficiency, such an attempt can only issue
m deeper degradation and ruin. It is not true that man be-
comes more noble and exalted in proportion as he rises above
authority. It is usurping a station which is not his, for which
he was never designed, and to which his nature has no adapta^
tion. No being but God can atford to stand beyond the jurist-
diction of sovereign authority. Every attempt of men to "be
as gods," in this respect, is as truly rebellion against the laws
of heaven and their own nature, as was that of our first parents
who fell by the same delusive presumption in Eden.

Here would be the place to introduce the arguments from
Revelation, viz : That God, the source of the highest aur
thoritt/y has explicitly enjoined obedience and respect to human
authority. Reference may be made to Matt. 22: 21. Rom.
13: 1, 7. 1 Tim. 2: 12. Titus 3: I. 1 Pet. 2: 13, 17, etc. in
relation to dvil authority — and to Ex. 20: 12. Luke 2: 51.
Eph. 6: 1. Col. 3: 20. 1 Tim. 3: 12, etc. in relation to parental
authority. But as our object is to present iWs subject to the
reason of man in the light of its own nature, we pass by the
declaration of the->vord of God. Nature teaches the absolute
necessity of positive authority for the government of man.

But authority, to be binding, must be legitimate ; although

286 AuCharity, a Source of [Oct.

it is not necessary to obligation that the subject should be aUe
to see the rigbtness of the precept. Yet it is necessary that he
should be able to see the rigbtness of the authority. It is from
this perception that the conscience is bound to obedience.
The assumption of authority by mere arbitrary power can fix
no sense of obligation upon the mind. It is a tyrannical usurpa-
tion, and all resistance to it, with the spirit if not the deeds of a
Brutus, is the dictate of (ireedom and nature. The inquiry
therefore is of the highest importance,

II. What i$ the test of legitimate authority 1

A wide field is here opened before us, but it will not be
necessary to our present purpose to explore it very extensively.
The following considerations will furnish a sufficient criterion of
the legitimacy or validity of the authority exercised.

1. The propriety of the relation between the sovereign and
the subject must be consulted.

There is in the nature and relations of things an inherent
fitness or unfitness to certain results. This is to be regarded in
the estimation of the rigbtness of the authority. Certain rela-
tions in themselves afford a strong presumption for or against
the right to command. That in which God stands to his
creatures as Creator and Preserver, or a Parent to his children,
fiimishes a priori a strong presumption in favor of the right to
exercise authority by the former over the latter. There is a
perceived propriety in it. So also between master and ser-
vant, teacher and pupil, the ascertained will of the majority, and
that of the minority, there is seen a natural fitness, which would
of itself lead the mind to fix on the one as the proper depository
of authority over the other. It would be doing violence to the
natural feelings to invert this order, and change the source of
authority to the other side of the relation. This consideration
however can only be presumptive. There can be no universal
test from this principle alone. Higher reasons may prevail to
remove authority from what may be called these natural
sources, and righteously invest another with it. The parent
may become utterly disqualified to govern hb family, tbe
instructor incompetent, and a nation find it necessary to leave
many individuals entirely out of the account in making its
estimate of the majority. The propriety of the relation there-
fore afibrds only presumptive and not positive right to authority.
It may be set aside for sufficient reasons, though never without
such reasons. Even in the case of tlie Supreme Being, some-

1&38.] Maral Ohligaiim. S87

thing besides creation and preservation is necessary to legitimate
authority. If a malevolent being had created us and given us
laws like himself, rebellion and not obedience would be duty.
This therefore is one item which is to be regarded as indicative
of the proper source of authority, and which is not to be set
aside but for strong countervailing reasons.

2. There mmt be competent qualifications.

This is an essential element in all valid authority. Where
the source of sovereignty is manifestly incompetent to the pur-
poses of authority, it can confer no obligation. The competency
is found in the possession of those qualifications which secure
the enactment of the best laws and the administration of the
best government which the nature of the case peroiits. The
intelligence and habits of the people, the exigencies of their
condition, and all the general circumstances which give peculi-
arity to their character must be taken into the account, and the
source of authority, which can rightly claim their obedience,
roust possess within itself those qualifications which secure to
that community the best government. There must be intelli-
gence to discern, rectitude to select, and power and decision to
execute, the best system of legislation for that people. The
possession of these qualities more than any thing else confirms
authority. Man must be governed, his nature demands it, and
that is the right source of authority which afibrds the highest
security for the best government.

In the divine government all things conspire to its absolute
perfection. God's relation to his creatures and his essential at-
tributes ensure perfection in the precept, the penalty, and the
execution. There is a government absolutely the best that cao
be for the subject. It is not essential to a perfect govemmeot
that it should secure universal obedience. The subject i$ a dis-
tinct agent, and sustains a distinct responsibility, and may there-
fore be most guilty, while the sovereign and his law are abso-
lutely perfect. If the law is the best for the subject, and its
sanctions righteously executed, it has done all that it can do,
and is itself perfect though many of its subjects are guilty of
wilTul disobedience. This is true of the divine government.
But in all human governments there can be only an approxima-
tion to perfection. No human source of authority can be found
competent to secure an infallible system. That source of au-
thority, however, is legitimate which gives the highest security
for the greatest attainable degree oi perfection. This is the

288 Authority f a Source of [Oct.

theory of 9II correct legislation. Here is the basis of all good
government. The general rule of investing the parent with the
authority of family government is the highest security for do-
mestic peace and prosperity. In all the different forms of civil
governments this principle is the test of its legitimacy — the best
security for the best government. Not the legitimacy of de-
scent, or the regularity of election self-considered, but these 00-
ly as means to an end, and connected with the security of the
best government for the people. To this test all authority must
submit as the proof of its validity. If it cannot endure the ap-
plication, it is wrong, and ought at once to yield itself to correct
tion ; and if it can endure it, it is right, no matter what its form
of administration. The most absolute despotism is as legiti-
mate as the authority of a parent, if it secures to the people the
best government for their peculiar genius and character, and
rebellion against it, is treason of as deep guilt as that against the
most popular form of government on earth.

Here is the ground for the inapplicability of popular republi-
can forms of government to many nations; They are not pre-
pared for so much freedom. All governments to be legitimate
must be for the good of the governed, and in many instances the
will of the majority would not secure it. They are not ripe
for a free popular elective system. There is not sufficient in-
telligence and virtue to make it safe to trust the supreme author-
ity in their hands. It would be to their own destruction. In-
deed it is clear that there has never yet been a nation, where
it would be safe to carry out fully the principle of intrusting su-
preme power to a majority. Our own government may ap-
proach the nearest to such a state, of any that has yet been
administered ; but clearly we are yet at a long remove from such
a proposition. Who would not shrink from the experiment of
throwing the destinies of this nation into the hands of a majority
of every man, woman and child within it ? But why not do
this ? Simply because it is clear that it would not secure the
best legislation. Yea, there is the most fearful ground of ap-
prehension, that the gateways are already thrown so wide open,
that the sweeping flood of vice and licentiousness and popular
frenzy which is rolling in shall overwhelm the last hope of free-
dom forever. If the work of education and moral culture be
not pushed forward with a zeal and energy proportioned to the
exigencies of the crisis, there can be no other issue. A popu-
lar government, administered in such a way as not to secure the

1838.] Moral Obligatum. 289

good of the people, is as really usurpation and tyranny as the
most arbitrary despotism. There is no political condition so in-
tolerable as hopeless subjection to the passions of a corrupt and
ignorant populace. Any nation will flee from its horrors to the
sway of the most arbitrary despot in preference. We may
wrap ourselves in our false security, and cry '' peace and safety^'
with as much credulity as we will, but if that majority which is
to hold the sovereign power of this nation for the next quarter
of a century be not both intelligent and virtuous, the knell of
republican liberty will, ere that period has passed, have tolled
its requiem. The tide of events will set back in the opposite
direction. The mass of the people, under the ancient dynas-
ties of the old world, will no longer be seen struggling to free
themselves firom the oppressions of hereditary power ; but even
in this new world, the descendants of revolutionary heroes will
be obliged, for very safety, to flee back to the strength of mon-
archy for protection. If the alternative is to lie between the
domination of a corrupt, capricious, blind and infatuated popu-
lace, or the prompt authority of a monarchical government,
there can be no hesitation which m//, and which ought to be
chosen. This nation can never rest in a position, where the
government does not secure the good of the people to as high
a degree as they are prepared to appreciate. If they are not
sufficiently virtuous and mtelligent for the superior blessings of
free republican institutions, they will soon lose them. No form
of government can keep human nature to a higher point of ele-
vation, than that for which its own intellectual and moral worth
prepares it. For our own preservation we must go back again
to the bondage of Egypt, and eat '' the leeks and garlics,'^ and
" make brick" as best we may, till another generation shall
arise more worthy to enter in and enjoy the promised land.
The source of authority, with us as with all other nations, to be
legitimate and valid, must be competent to secure to the people
the highest political good for which they are qualified.

3. Its legiilaiion mmi not contravene the daitns of natural
obligation.

One reason for the necessity of positive authority in the gov-
ernment of man, as we have seen, lies in the fact, that many
things essential to the welfare of society can never be settled,
by sending each man to direct his conduct by the nature of
things. A great proportion of the province of legislation lies
without the region of direct intuition. All that we can have,

Vol. XIL No. 32. 37

290 Atahority, a Stmrct of [Oct.

therefore, to bind the conscience in those cases ^bere the nafuie
of things does not settle the obligation, is the perception of the
rigbtness of the authority. And as another test of the validity
of it, we may appeal to reason in all those cases where it comes
within the province of reason. Where they are both within the
same 6eld, authority roust harmonize with reason or all its legis*
lation is a nullity. If a positive precept contradict a plain dugr
from the nature of things, no authority however high or vener"
able can make it obligatory. God himself appeals to this stan-
dard for the rectitude of his own dealings as a moral governor:
'< Are not my ways equal" — ^^ Come, let us reason together."
And because of the force of this appeal, it is true, that ^' every
mouth will be stopped" in the judgment. (Sod's positive legis-
lation never may, and never i2oe«, contradict the law of nature.
Wherever they meet, there is everlasting harmony. Divine au-
thority often reaches beyond the limits of human reasoo, but
never contradicts it.

And when any human authority demands compliance with
unnatural laws, and intuitively perceived wrong edicts, no obli-
gation goes with it. Submission is then a crime, and resistance
a duty. God has legislated there in the majesty of nature, and
all contradictory authority is usurpation. This must, however,
be a case of clear intuition. It does not apply to instances i£
disputed propriety, or prudential expediency. If there is not
direct contradiction to a clear case of natural right and cxmi-
science, obligation is on the side of obedience ; for the reasons
which sustain the authority itself, are plainer than those against
its legislation.

4. It must not conflict with any higher authority.

All sovereignty is supreme within its own jurisdiction. It b
absolute so far as its limits extend. But these limits are de6ned
by principles, not persons. One person may come legitimately
under the authority of a score of sovereignties. He may owe
allegiance to the authority of a college, a parent, civil govern-
ment, a church, and God's general government. Thus to a
single individual the sources of his responsibility may be multi-
plied indefinitely. There is however a principle which setdes
the limits of his allegiance in the midst of them all. The uni-
versal principle is — a lower source of authority can never bind
in conflict with a higher source. There may perhaps not un-
frequently be some difficulty in setding the points of precedence
between conflicting authorities. Questions of casuistiy may

1838.] Moral ObUgaiian. 291

often arise here which shall require more or less care and dis-
cernment to decide correctly. But in all such cases it is be-
cause the fact is obscure, not because there is any hesitation in
regard to the truth of the principle. Once settle satisfactorily
which is the paraniouDt authority, and the mind no longer hesi-
tates. Obligation to the higher authority rests at once upon
the conscience.

It was on this principle that the three pious Jews refused to
bow down to Nebuchadnezzar's golden image. A higher au-
thority bad forbidden the worship of idols. This also induced
Daniel to make his supplication three times a day, notwithstand-
ing the prohibition according to the law of the Medes and
Persians. And this too was the ground of the bold and un-
answerable appeal of the apostles : '^ Whether it be right in the
sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto God, judge
ye." This is a principle of universal application. A higher
authority forever prostrates all obligation from the conflicting
claims of a lower. The lower authority in legislating against
the enactments of the higher, so far forth nullifies itself and
becomes a non-entity.

Enough has now probably been said to show the necessity of
authority to the well being of human society, and the criterion
of its legitimacy. When under these conditions, authority from
any source comes upon man, it binds his conscience as inviolably
as the clearest dictate of natural obligation. Yea, it resolves
itself ultimately into a natural obligation, for he intuitively
perceives the rectitude of the authority, and that is as natural
a source of obligation, as when he intuitively perceives the
rectitude of the precept. He knows before heaven that
he is thus bound, and that disobedience to such authority is
a sin against conscience and God. More might be said upon
the nature and extent of the sanctiom by which positive au-
thority is to be sustained, and upon the methods of administror
tiony but this is sufficient for the purpose we have had in view,
to show the nature of positive authority as a source of moral
obligation.

The following truths result directly from the foregoing view
of this subject.

1. Authority may give obligation to thai which would
othervnge have been a matter of indifference.

If the proper source of authority deem any particular course
of procedure, form, or ceremony, to be important in gaining

292 Authority i a Source of [Oct.

the ends for which it exists, it has a right to impose them.
And though otherwise a matter of entire indiflerence, thej are
henceforth binding upon the subject. The rightness of the
authority settles the question of obligation. Divine authoritj
has thus settled the proportion of time to be observed as bolj,
and fixed the particular day, which is henceforth binding upoo
man, though in itself considered we may not be able to see why
it was a seventh rather than a sixth or an eighth part of time,
and though it be a matter of indifference in its own nature
which day of the week should be observed as the Sabbath.
After the enactments of authority, it is a matter of indiflereDce
no longer. So in civil governments, the forms of cAcial
investiture, the solemnization of the marriage contract, the
naturalization of foreigners, the specific regulations relating to
revenue, etc. all are matters of indifference in themselves, i. e.
other forms might have been substituted that would equally
well have subserved the same ends. The good of society,
however, requires that these matters should be regulated in
practice upon some principle of uniformity, and when the
proper authority has done it, it is no longer optional with each
man to follow his own private views of expediency or inclina-
tion in relation to it. He is bound as a good citizen and a
conscientious man faith Tuliy to obey the law. A father may
in the same way settle in his own family many regulations in
themselves wholly indifferent, and yet when thus settled by
parental authority, no member of that family is at liberty to
disregard them. We believe the consciences of many pro-
fessing Christians need quickening on this point. There is too
great a readiness in matters of this kind, where the law may
interfere with private interest, prejudice, or convenience, to
evade or directly disobey it, and keep the conscience quiet by
the fact of its original indifference to moral obligation. The
truth is, however, that neither in the sight of God nor an en-
lightened conscience, is it any longer a matter of indifference.
The rightful authority under which you live, is a source of
obligation as rigidly imperious as the dictates of natural intuitioD.
If you disobey or disregard it, you can neither be a good citi-
zen, a good Christian, nor an honest man. Whose conscience
soever it may be that thus slumbers, needs at once to be
aroused by its direct application to the point of responsibility.
Authority, as a source of moral obligation, should be placed
prominently before the mind, and the man habituate himself to

1838.] Moral ObUgaium. 293

the reflectioDy not — this thing is a matter of indifference in
itself — ^but roy conduct in relation to it is against law. If such
reflections be suppressed, the fact is not at all improbable, that
while you are searing your own moral sensibilities, you are also
directly contributing the whole force of your influence, in these
respects, to paralyze the power of law over others.

2. A refusal to obey^ unless the reasonableness of the pre^
cept be exhibited^ makes the man either a rebel or an outlaw.

To this extent every man has the right to demand evidence
before he can come under obligation — that the source of authori-
ty be legitimate, and that the legislation neither contradicts na-
ture nor higher authority. And this is all he can claim. The
sovereign is not obliged to explain the reasons for every precept
to his comprehension. If he understand what it is, this is
enough without explaining why it is. If he be legitimately cir-
cumscribed within the jurisdiction of the authority, be is bound
to yield obedience to it. If he is already a subject, his refusal
to obey without seeing the reasonableness of the command
makes him a rebel; if his voluntary consent is necessary in order
to his becoming a subject, and he will not obey the law without
the reason, he is an outlaw. In the first place, he assumes to
himself the place of the sovereign, and attempts to give law to
the authority which binds him, and he must be subdued or the
power of the government is prostrate. In the second, he dis-
cards authority upon its own territory where it must be supreme,
and thus makes it necessary that he should be forced beyond
the limits of its jurisdiction. By refusing allegiance to it upon
its own grounds, he cuts himself off from all right to its privi-
leges and protection, and that government owes it to its own
dignity and safety to banish him from the community. In the
one case the authority, for its own preservation, must punish, in
the other case it must expel. And such is the law of every
man's conscience, that he will be obliged to yield to the equity
of such a decision, and his mouth be stopped in every attempt
to reply against it.

3. The spirit of law fills the whole field of its jurisdiction.
So far as authority extends, it is omniscient, omnipresent and

supreme. It goes with every subject to his daily employment
and his secret retirement. Like the eye of God, it watches his
going out and coming in, his lying down and rising up. Its
protective power is over every place, and no harm can enter
but by the very act which violates its sacredness, and for which

294 Authority J a Source of Moral Obligation. [Oct.

it must mete out the merited retributiou. So also is it eyeiy
where with its approbation for obedience, and disapprobatioa
for disobedieuce. Though hidden from every human eye tbe
deed of violation is not bidden from law — its pure spirit has
been wounded — and an hour of reckoning must come. At that
great day when all things shall be seen as they are, then will
every law under which we have acted be present with its testi-
mony. The wound given to authority even in the most seclud*
ed secretness, will then be an open wound in our own conscien-
ces, defying further concealment, and inflicting the retributioo
precisely proportioned to demerit.

Man may have forgotten or despised the authority which
bound him, but that can never overlook the transgressions com-
mitted against itself, nor refuse to lift its voice against himwhea
the record of his sins is to be publicly authenticated. Whether
it were some smothered deed of darkness, or more deeply cov-
ered still, some foul purpose or malignant passion deep withio
the bosom, the eye of law was there a living witness to tbe
guilt. Secrecy of wickedness b impossible, for tbe spirit of
legitimate authority is every where, to see, to feel, and at tbe
appointed time to testify.

4. Disobedience to the lowest righifvl authority is as trubj
tin in the sight ofheaven^ as disobedience against the highest.

The degree of guilt is to be estimated by both tbe majesty of
the authority and the strength of wilful rebellion. Tbe same
degree of wilful rebellion against a positive command of God,
is doubtless more heinous than tbe same degree of rebellion
against the law of man. But it is not problematical, that in the
day of final reckoning when all sin shall be weighed accordiogto
its real demerit, that many transgressions of human law shall be
found to involve more guilt in the sight of God, than maof
other transgressions of divine law. The difference in wilful aod
depraved rebellion may have far more than counterbalanced tbe
difference which would aocrue from the distinction of authority*
The conscience may have been more wounded, the soul foor*
defiled by the former, than the latter. It is not very unlikely
that at the last day it will be seen, that the motives and feelmgs
by which we have been actuated in disobeying some of tbe laws
of the land, have laid a heavier weight in the balances of the
judgment against us, than some other violations of tbe direct
commands of heaven. We are not to estimate guilt solely by
the nature of tbe law we violate. We may be greater siDoeisio

1838.] M^eto-Gothk Language. 895

violating positive authority, than others are in violating intuitive
right, and greater in violating human authority than others in
violating God's authority. God will at the last day throw all the
various circumstances of light, and knowledge, and privilege,
and the temper of mind, and wilfulness of purpose, into the esti-
mate by which the retributions of eternity are to be awarded.
This makes our responsibilities most fearfully solemn. We must
carry to the judgment, a character formed under the influences
of every source of authority which has reached us, and it will
not be the same to us in eternity in relation to any of them,
whether they have been obeyed or disobeyed. All will be
there to lay a burden upon the soul in proiMrtion both to the
weight of the authority, and the wilfulness or the rebellion.

ARTICLE III.

The Veasion of Ulphilas and the Moeso-Gothic

Lanouage.

By W. W. Oroeoouf b, CbmbridfOf Mi.

Modern ethnographers have supposed that the North and
Middle of Europe were settled by three successive emigrations
from the East. The Celts came first, and were finally scatter-
ed throughout the western parts of Europe on the borders of
the Atlantic ; and also formed the population of the British
Isles. The German, Teutonic, or Gothic tribes followed them,
and these last were pushed into the centre and north of Europe
by the Sclavonic nations. It is with the second of these emi-
grations, the Teutonic, that we are concerned.

The earlier information of the Greek and Roman writers with
regard to the more northern nations of Europe was exceedingly
meagre and unsatisfactory. When the intelligence, that Rome
had been sacked by the Gauls, B. C. 392, was first received at
Athens, it was said* that the conquerors were the Hyperbo-
reans, a people who bad descended the icy mountains from the
unknown regions of the. north. Herodotus, writing about B. C.
330, calls the Celts ol iaxatoi ngo^ riUov ivofAtrnp, and is so

* Plutarch Caroill. e. 21.

5296 Moeto^Qothic Langue^e. [Oct.

uncertain about their location, that be places them beyond the
pillars of Hercules.* But of the Germans, though not meii>
tioned under the name which they received in after years, be
evidently had a more distinct knowledge. Among the Scythian
tribes, one is called by him the Bovdipo^, who were i^ifog fttfu
xal noUovy a great nation with blue eyes and red hair, living in
a country covered with a dense forest, in the midst of which was
a great lake ;t and he adds that they were a nomadic race, and
spoke a different language from the Scythians. Taking mto
account their physical character as difiering fix)m tbe other race
of Scythians ' bald, with flat noses and large chins,'| and the
relative position of the other Scythian tribes mentioned by tbe
great historian, we can trace tCpart of the Germans to their 6ist
situation on the shores of the Euxine.

But, shortly after the time of Herodotus, a more certain know-
ledge of the great Teutonic race was attained through the bold-
ness of Py theas of Marseilles, celebrated equally for bis learning
and his maritime discoveries. He had already reached the Cas-
seterides, and about B. C. 320 he sailed to Thule,^ (probablj
Tellemarck, Norway,) || and from thence directed bis couise
southward, and afterwards eastward to the amber coasts.1
There he found two nations, whom he calls Teutones and Gat-
tones. We see no reason to doubt (as many have), the iden-
tity of the Guttones, with the Gothones, the Gothi, and tbe
Goths, who make so distinguished a figure in the early bistmy
of the dark ages. Tbe Gothones, dwelt near the mouth of the
Vistula, and on the shores of the Baltic, A. D. 80 and 180, and
if they were not the nation with whom Pytheas met, the coin-
cidence of names is at least very striking.**

The Gothonesft appear first in history as a part of the Mar-

• B. II. 33. IV. 49.

t Herod. IV. 108. Mannert's Ahe Geographie, Vol. IIL chap. 3.

} lb. IV. 23. § Strabo, I. 63. II. 114.

I Adelung Hit Gescbich.der Deutschen, p. 80.

ir Pliny, Nat. Hist. XXXVII. 8.

** Those who are interested in the controversy can consalt Ade-
laog, tilt. Geschich. der Deut. p. 87 and 200. Mannert's Qeog. Vd. HI*
p. 353. Bosworth, Pref. to Aog. Sax. Diet. p. 113.

tf Guitones, Pliny after Pytheas. Gothones and Gotooes, Taehtti
jTv^diffi, Ptolem. Grothi and Gotthi by the writers of the third aod
following centuries. Cossini of Steph. of Byzantium § 490. Adelon^
p. 94. They are also by mistake called by some writers Getae, Sa^

1838.] MoesO'Oothic Language. S97

coroaonic league, B. C. 19. But until they began to emigrate^
little or nothing is known of them. The cause of these emigra-
tions has not yet been satisfactorily asceiiained, but it is in the
highest degree probable that they were compulsory, the result
of distress, perhaps pestilence, famine, or an overplus of popu-
lation ; or the pressure of a superior power, like movements of
a similar nature in later times. The repi-esentation that their
removal was in consequence of extraordinary prosperity is to be
regarded as a fiction of the bards for the purpose of flattering
their countrymen.* Be that as it may, the Gothic nations left
' the eastern bank of the Vistula between the reigns of the An-
tonines and of Alexander Severus. A portion of these tribes
probably crossed the Baltic, and settled in Sweden and the isle
of Gothland.f The remainder, forming the larger part, wander-
ed through the eastern part of Germany, and the plains of Po-
land and Russia, swelling their ranks with the tribes which they
conquered. Then passing by the lower Danube, they overran
and settled the north coasts of the Black Sea.| Afterwards
allured by the rich fields of Dacia, they carried their arms
through that country with equal success ; and from thence
into M oesia. The relaxed discipline of the Roman armies was
unable to withstand their fierce valor ; they took by storm the
city of Philippopolis, and completed their triumph by the de-
feat and slaughter of the Roman emperor Decius. But after-
wards, about A. D. 250, they were in turn defeated ; and pur-
sued beyond the Danube by Aemilianus, the governor of Fan-
nonia and Moesia.

When in Dacia, the Goths divided themselves into two por-
tions, and settled at either extremity of that country : those
dwelling in the west, took the name of Visigothi, Vesegothae,
West-Goths, and the inhabitants of the eastern part were called

mati, and Scythians. — The Gothoni of Tacitus, and Kotini of Die
were a Gallic race.

• Niebuhr, Hist, of Rome, Vol. II. p. 387.

t Jornandes asserts that the Gothic people originally issued from
Scandinavia, called by the ancients vagina gentium, and describes the
manner in which they came over. But no reliance is to be placed
on his account, as it so evidently contradicts all historical testimony
with regard to tbe settlement of Germany.

I These were supposed by the Greeks and Romans to be Scyth-
ians. More of this hereafter.

Vol, XII. No. 32. 38

896 Moeso-Gothic Language. [Oct.

Ostro- or Austro-Gotbi, East-Goths. There is no reil fban-
dation for the assertion of Cassiodorus, so carefiilly repeated by
Jornandes,* that they obtained those denominations from tbev
(supposed) original seats in Scandinavia. The work of the
K>rnier historian was produced when the Goths were in power
in Italy, and for the purpose of flattering the conquerors, while
that of Jomandes was merely an abridgment of his predeces-
sor's labors.

At the time that the Goths conquered West Dacia, they
found there the GiUae, a Thracian tribe, by many supposed to
be identical with the Goths. This error has probably arisen
from the fact that the Getae amalgamated with their conquerois.
But there is no doubt of the Germanic origin of this nation ;
taking into consideration the circumstance that Germanic tribes
were scattered through Scythia, (which will be considered more
at length hereafter,) it will not add to the difficulties of the
question when we find that Herodotus and Ovid speak of this
people as a Scythian nation. But Ovid was evidently describ-
ing a German people when he spoke of the ' flavi Coralli/ and
more particularly

Mixta isit hnec (gens) quamvfs inter Graiosque Getaaque,

A male pacatis plus trahic ora Getia,
Vox fero, trux vultus, veriasima Martis imago,

Not) coma, non ulla barba resecta manu.}

Compare this description with that of Tacitus, and it will be
seen that the poet and historian had before their eyes the same
people. It must likewise he borne in mind that Herodotus
speaks of two races of Scythians ; one with blue eyes, and red
or light hair ; and another, among whom are the Agrippaei
* bald from their birth, both males and females, with flat noses
and large chins. '^

The Ostrogoths and Visigoths from the early part of the
third century remained two distinct nations. When the latter
people settled in Dacia, Christianity was already established
there, and that it was embraced by them at an early period
after their settlement, is known from the fact that the signature
of Theophilus, the bishop of the West Goths, appears in the

« c. 17. de Goth, sive Get. Orig. f Epist de Pont. lib. IV. ch. II.

t Ovid. Trist. lib. V. Eleg. VII. 11. Wiseman's Lect p. 9a Note.

§ Herod. IV. 23. Vide more at length Hippocrates, p. 292. Niebubr^
kUine Schriflen, p. 362.

1838.] Moe$(hOotkic Language. 999

records of the Council of Nice, A. D. 325. The christian
Goths remained in this country, until they were attacked by the
Huns, a nation from the north of China or Tartary : they were
consequently induced to request the protection of the emperor
Valens, which was done through the intervention of their
bishop Ulphilas. Moesia, (now Servia, and Bulgaria,) was
assigned them as a residence, and they emigrated into that
country about A. D. 376. Jomandes gives the following
description of their situation : ^' Ad pedes enim montis gens
multa sedit pauper et imbellis, nihil abundans, nisi armento
diversi generis pecorum et pascuis, silvaque lignorum, patum
habens tritici, caeterarum specierum est terra faecunda. Vineas
▼ero, nee si sunt alibi, certi eorum cognoscent, ex vicinis locis
sibi vinum negociantes, nam lacte aluntur.*" It seems then that
their manner of living did not differ from that of the German
tribes in the time of Tacitus.f

But their nomadic character was not destined to endure.
The influence and example of the other Goths led them on,
and the lone; and bloody history of their contests with the
Roman and Byzantine legions now commenced. Under Alaric,
in 396, they made an irruption into Greece, conquered the
Peloponnesus, and their leader became prefect of Illyria and
king of the West Goths. Early in the fifth century, he led bis
armies into Italy, and twice sacked Rome, and from thence
marched into Spain, where in 412 was founded a kingdom,
which, after a space of about three hundred years, during the
reign of Roderick, was conquered by the Saracens. The
Visigoths here disappear from history. The Ostrogoths were
more unfortunate. They were not permitted to enter Moesia
for protection against the ravages of the Huns, and were there-
fore overcome by that horde of barbarians. About the middle
of the fifth century, they liberated themselves, and embraced
Christianity. After the fall of the Western Empire imder
Odeacer, the emperor Zeno, in the year 489, induced
Theodoric, the king of the Ostrogoths, to march into Italy ; and
in 493, the latter became king of Italy, and laid the foundation
of a neW Ostrogothic empire, which included within its limits,
(besides Italy,) Rbaetia, Vindelicia, Noricum, Dalmatia,
Pannonia, and Dacia beyond the Danube. Of this immense
empire, he made Ravenna the capital. The Gothic rule lasted

* De rebus Get. c. 51, ^ De Mor. Germ. 5, 15, 23.

300 Moesa-Goihic Language. [Oct.

about sixty years, and was terminated by the victories of
Belisarius and Narsus.

It is in the Moeso-Gotbic,* that we find the first specimen of
Germanic literature ; viz. the famous version of the Bible made
by Ulphilas,t the bishop and primate of the Moeso-Goths.
The brevity of the notices of Ulphilas, in the works of the
contemporary historians, Philostorgius, Socrates, Sozomenus,
and Theodoret, leaves us in greal uncertainty with regaid to
his origin, and the prominent events of his life. The account
given by Philostorgius is exceptionable, from the known partiality
of that writer's views. He states that Ulpliilas was not a Goth,
but a Cappadocian by birth ; that his kindred and ancestors
were Christians, and inhabitants of the small town Sadagotiina
in Cappadocia ; and were carried away prisoners by the Goths,
during their great inroad into Lydia, Bythynia, Phrygia and
Cappadocia in the year 266, by means of which the christian
religion was introduced among the conquerors. But on t)ie
other hand, the German name of Ulphilas (Wolflein,) the great
reverence in which he was held by the Goths, his translation of
the Bible into the Gothic language, in addition to the bad
reputation of Philostorgius as a historian, and the opposition of
his testimony to that of his contemporaries, are sufficient to
prove the Gothic origin of Ulphilas. (t is indeed said, that the
parents of the bishop, if Cappadocian, had become domesticated
among the Goths, and had so far adopted the language and
habits of that people, that they might have given their son a
Gothic name. But there is no evidence to substantiate this
supposition by proofs; and the charge of Arianism equally
wants confirmation.

All that is known certainly with regard to Ulphilas may be
told in a very few words. From the year 360 to about 380,
he was bishop of the christian Goths in Dacia, Thrace, and
Moesia. In the year 359, he attended the synod at Coostan*
tinople. Afterwards, before 376, he was twice sent by his
people to the emperor Valens, and successfully executed their
commission to obtain protection against the Huns : and io

^ The Goths after their settlement of Moesiii, were called Moeso-
Goths.

f Variously written ; Urphilas, Urpliilns, Gilftilns, Gudillns, Gal-
filns, Gu!filas,Ulphias, Ulpiu^, Gulfias, Hulfius, Wulfila, etc. Buschvi^,

1838.] Moeso-Gothic Language. 301

accordance with the permission of the emperor, the Goths, in
number 200,000 under Fritigem and Ablavius crossed the
Danube, and settled in Moesia : with them went Ulphilas.
The time of his death is unknown, but it probably took place in
379 or 380, as under Theodosius, Theotimus went to Tomis as
bishop of the Goths. No one before or after his time was so
useful to the Goths, and they appreciated his worth ; his
learning and his virtues were so well known that they passed
into a proverb : Whatever is done by Ulphilas, is well done.
The two most prominent actions of bis life, are the (so-called)
invention of the Gothic Alphabet, and the translation of the
Holy Scriptures into Moeso-Gothic*

The testimonies of the early historians concur in ascribing
the invention of the Moeso-Gothic Alphabet to Ulphilas.
Socrates, who flourished about 440 says Ovkq^iXago idlt' FoiOwv
inlaxonog ypu/Mfiuia iq,eu(}i roT&ixuf. Sozomenus witnesses
ngiStoi di ygafAfiUTfau ivgttijg avrog lyivexo^ and Philostorgius<^
gives the same account. But there are many considerations
which will lead us to modify, if not to entirely set aside their
relations.

It will be granted that Ulphilas, in translating the Scriptures
into his native tongue, designed that they should be extensively
circulated, and that they should be accessible to all who could
read. If then he invented the characters in which the transla-
tion was to be written, who would have read it after it was
completed? — particularly if the countrymen of Ulphilas were
acquainted with other alphabets, and even had one of their own
before, as we shall prove. Even supposing that the bishop
invented it, is it not in the last degree surprising that the
alphabet (with the exception of two letters only) should coincide
in the form of its characters with the alphabets of nations with
whom his people had intercourse ?

Had the Germanic nations an alphabet, and were letters in
use among them ?

We have the strongest reason to believe that the Runic
letters were in actual use throughout the whole North of
Europe from the remotest ages. They originated in the East,
and were carried into Europe by the Teutonic and Scandina-

* ZabD'8 Ulphilas. Hist. Crit. Einleitung, p. 19—21.

t Hist Eccles. L. IV. e. Sa

X Hist. Eccl. L. VI. 37. % Hist. Uccl. L. II. 5.

S03 MoesO'Ooihic Language. [Oct.

Tian tribes. Runic inscriptions have been found in Tartaijy*
which fact will not appear strange when we learn that the
family of Gothic nations once occupied large tracts of Tartary,
that some of its branches inhabited Transoxana, and were
found even as far as the Altai mountains. They were well
known to the people of Ektstem Asia who could not fail to be
struck by the singularity of their language, their light hair, blue
eyes, and white complexions ; traits particularly remarkable in
the midst of men dark-colored, with brown eyes and daric hair,
who have in the end occupied their place. The distingubhed
orientalist, M. Abel-Remusat, from whose valuable researches
the above is taken, adds, " the facts which I have collected oo
these points are so numerous and so positively set forth in the
Chinese writers, that no doubt can remain."t Death prevented
him from publishing these proofs.

But the learned geographer, professor Hitter of Berlin, has
since solved all difficulties, by proving that the Chinese writers
refer frequently to nomadic races, having blue eyes and red hair,
and that they relate, that in the second century (B. C. 177) be-
fore Christ, a portiou of one of these tribes, having been driven
westward by the Hiong-nu, inhabited the shore^s of Lake Bhal-
kush, and the river Hi, under the name of U-sun or U-siun ;{
afterwards, probably during the fourth century, they emigrated
southward.^ Five other races are mentioned by the Chinese
annalists, as having blue eyes and red hair: viz., theSchu-le or
Ehin-scha ; the Khute, west of the U-sun ; the Ting-ling,
north of the U-sun, and west of lake Baikal ; the Kian-kuan or
Hakas, on the Yenesei ; and the Alan or Yan-thsai, north of
the Caspian Sea.|| We regret that our limits forbid us to enter
more deeply upon this highly interesting subject.

But to return to the Runic letters. In an ode quoted by
Bartholin,ir the poet ascribes their invention to Odin : " The
letters which the great ancient traced out ; which the godscom-

* Mallet's N'ortliera Antiquities. Vol. I. p. 312. note.

t Recherches sur les Langues Tartares. Prelim, p. zlir. and xk.
Wiseman's Lectures, p. 101. Am. £d.

{ Called Hieou-siun by the older, and Ou-siun by the later Chmese
writers. An etymologist might perhaps imagine that he has here
discovered the original form of the word Suiones.

§ Ritter's Erdkunde, Vol. II. Part I. p. 194. and 431—7.

II lb. p. 434. % Edda Isl. p. 649.

1838.] Moe$(hGothic Language. 308

posed ; which Odin the sovereign of the gods eDgraved." This
is equivalent to a declaration that they had been so long in use
that their origin was unknown. The attempt indeed has been
made to prove that the ancient Germans had no written alpha-
bet, but the passage in Tacitus* on which the assertion is found-
ed, is now decided to have been misunderstood. It is at least
certain that they were extensively in use among the heathen na-
tions in the north of Europe. That they were not derived from
the Roman alphabet, as has been supposed by some, is shown by
their difference of formation, and by the smaller number (sixteen)
of the Runic letters, which likewise is a proof of their great an-
tiquity, and perhaps too, of their eastern origin. Runic staves
are mentioned by Venantius Fortunatus, a Latin poet of the
sixth century :

Barbara fraxineis pingatur Runa tabellts
Quodque Papyrua agit, virgula plana valeLf

If then Runic characters were in use, among any of the Ger-
man tribes, from their close connection, and the identity or similar-
ity of their customs, it may safely be inferred that they were
known and in use among the Goths.

But the Goths were likewise acquainted with the Greek and
Latin alphabets. After the Gothic settlement of Dacia and
Moesia, the new inhabitants were in habits of constant and in-
timate intercourse with the Greeks and Romans. MSS. and
epistles in both these languages were within the reach of the
more intelligent. Knowing then that the learned Ulphilas was
acquainted with the Runic, Greek and Roman alphabets, it
would be natural to suppose that he would have made use of
them in the formation of a new alphabet. This would have
been probable, even if every vestige of the language and alpha-
bet had been lost. Let us tlien compare the Moeso-Gothic
characters with the Runic, Greek, and Latin alphabets, and
from the points of agreement, and difference, we shall be able
to decide how far Ulphilas was indebted to them, and what is
oria;inal with himself.

Ulphilas, then, drew from the Greeks the forms of g (c), 1,
p, u (y), and x. From the Latin were borrowed u (qu), h,
g (g and j), d. The forms common to both languages are e,

• Germ. 19. "

t Lib. VII. apig. 18. Vid. Wormii Literat. Runic, p. 7.

304 MoesO'Oothic Zjonguage. [Oct.

z, k, m, n, o. These conclusions are formed from a careful ex-
amination of the letters in use among the Greeks and Romans
from the firet to the sixth century.*

From the Runic was taken the character u.

The letters common to the Latin, Greek, and Runic are a,
b, i, r, s, t, f.

He invented 4>, th, and O9 hw, or took them firom an M
Germanic alphabet now lost.f

The word inveiUionf as used by the Greek historians most
merely signify an adoption by Uiphilas of other alphabets for
the written Moeso-Gothic. The Greeks had probably never
heard of the Gothic alphabet until brought among them by
Uiphilas. The introducer at once became the inventor.]:

These Gothic characters after the fall of the western empire
were extensively used throughout Europe, but were thrown
aside soon after the French adopted the Roman letters. At a
meeting of the synod, held in Lyons in 1091, the Spaniards
totally abolished their use.^

The voice of history unanimously proclaims Uiphilas to be
the translator of the Scriptures into his own tongue. One his-
torian || states that the book of Kings, (which then included tbe
two books of Samuel,) was omitted because its nature was such
as to excite the fierce and warlike passions of the Gotbs. Bat
the books of Moses, Joshua, and Judges are open to the same
objection. And the other historians are always particular in
speaking of raV ^flag ygaqxxg, hgas p/fiXov^, divinas scripturas.f
The time occupied in translation has been variously stated,
many supposing it to have been the work of twenty years, from
360 to 380. But Socrates intimates,^^ and the language of the
version proves, that it was done after the Goths settled in Moe-
sia. If then the death of Uiphilas took place in 379, as is
generally believed, the task must have been accomplished be-

^ See Bau 111 lei o's Tables at the end of hie Unterrucbaogeo.

t The Qreek appears to have been tbe ground work ; eighleea let-
ters are common to the two alphabets. The connection of the Goths
with tbe Greeks was more intimate than with the Romans.

I Mallet's Northern Antiquities, Vol. I. p. 311.

§ Priestley's Lect. 00 Theory of Languages, etc. p. 41.

II Philoetorgius. Hist. Eocl. 11. 5.

% This question is definitely settled by the diaeoveries of
••L.IV.c3a

1838.] Moeso'Oothic Language. 305

tween 376, the year of emigration beyond the Danube, and that
year. Industrious and learned, a perfect master of his own lan-
guage, though no grammatical treatises probably existed, he
found little difficulty in expressing exactly the sense of the
original.

It was long a matter of dispute whether the translation was
made from the Greek or Latin ; but the question is now pretty
generally decided in favor of the Greek. We shall briefly sum
up the arguments for the latter belief.

1. The orthography observed. EI=/' F before F and K=iVl

2. The etymological care. Ulphilas took the greatest pains
to render as literally as possible the sense of the Greek, par-
ticularly in accordance with the etymology. Thus he trans-
lates navtmv dkonavrwfuiiaip, ALLAIM THAIM ALLBRUNS-
TIM, Mark 12: 33. Examples of this nature are to be met
with on «very page.*

3. It is to be observed that the order and language of the
Greek text was most scrupulously followed as far as the Gothic
idiom would allow. The translator frequently uses the article
sa, so, thata, to correspond with the Greek article, and places
it in the same relative position. An instance of this is found in
Mark 15: 39, o Sv^gtonog ovrog viog ^v ^iov, sa manna sa
sunus was goths. The article is likewise often omitted, where
it is wanting in the original, as diov iifi^ viog, goths im sunus.f
In many passages the Gothic remains faithful to the Greeks
when all Latin versions leave it ; e. g. ol av^gmnoi oi noiftiveg
is rendered in Gothic by jah thai mans thai hairdjos ]% not any,
even of the Codices in Blanchini, have viri pastores.^ In order
to show how closely the Gothic follows the Greek, we select at
random a part of the parable of the sower, and give it below in
both languages, with a literal Latin translation.

Greek, E^ijX^iv 6 OTtiigwv rov anfiga^ rov anogov avrov ' *a*
Gothic Urrann saiands da saian fraiwa seinamma. jah

Latin, Exiit serens ad serere semini suo. et

iv rcj) (mtlguv avtov, o fiiv tmae nagct «ijy odov ' scoJ
miththanei saiso. sum gadraus faur wig. jah

interim sevit, quoddam concidit ante viam. et

* Hug's IntroducL p. 295. f John 10: 36.

t Luke 2: 15. § Zahn's Ulphilas. Introd. p. 30l

Vol. XII. No. 32. 39

306 MoesO'Gothic Language. Oct.

xarfnatij&Ti, xul la mttii^tt tov ovgavov natiq^ayip av%6. xtd

gatrudon warth, jah fuglos himimB fietun tfaatau jah

conculcatum fiebat et aves coeli vorruot hoc et

iiiooy tneasif inl zijv nirpav* xat qwi^ iitipomOii,

anthar gadraus ana staina jah uskijanata gathaursDoda,

aliud concidit super lapida et enatuxn exaniit

ditt to pt] tXfiv intfAadoi,

in thizei ni habaida qurammitha. ^

propter quod non habuit humorem. < y /t • . ^

4. The mistakes made. The translator in Matt. 27 : 53,
read %H(ii»oiv for KaKHfAtifitvwp : in Luke 7: 25, tgofp^ for rgv-
q^n- See also Luke 3: 14. John 16: 6. Matt. 8: 9.*

5. It is easy to see that the translation was made from a
MS. of the Constantinopolitan recension, though there seem
cases in which Ulphilas does not follow Lucian. We have not
room to bring passages into actual juxta-position, but by turning
to Hug, p. 296 — ^7, the inquirer cannot fail to satisfy himself.

The version of Ulphilas was not long allowed to reuiun
without corruption. In the MSS. one of the Latin versions is
sometimes found written side by side with the Gothic ;t and
when the texts differed, the Gothic was altered so as to agree
with the Latin, though perhaps at times merely for the purpose
of making the line and verses of each to correspond.}; When
not actually brought together collations were made, and mar-
ginal notes inserted, which were afterwards incorporated into
the text. Many therefore are the corruptions which exist in
a text intended as an exact translation of the Lucianian recen-
sion. And this also accounts for the error into which some
learned men have fallen in supposing the Gothic version to be
founded on the Latin.

There is but one voice among the learned as to the value of
this translation. It precedes the version of Jerome, and must
be preferred to that by the critics of the New Testament. It
adds another to the glorious links of the chain which binds all
nations together in unity of faith, proving that the doctrines of
the christian religion were not founded on human wisdom, but
were establisi.hed by divine authority. Every new version dis-
covered adds still greater weight to the integrity and purity of

* Compare with these passages the Cod. Brixinnus. See Hug^
Introd. p. 295—6, and Zahn*8 Ulphilas, p. 30 for other examples.

f Vide Fragments of Epist to Romans. % Hug Introd. p. 297.

1838.] MoetihGothic Language. 307

the Holy Scriptures, for false readings cannot be found in all
MSS* But who shall judge between the false and the true ?

Of this great translation of Ulphilas, only fragments remain.
The history of the different portions, and of their transmission to
us is rather curious.

The first specimen found was the Codex Argenteus, so called
from its letters of silver. The early history of this MS. is
wrapped in great obscurity. It was doubtless made in the fifth
or sixth century when the Goths were in power in Italy, but
where it was preserved during the next thousand years is not
known. For a long time it was in the Abbey of Werden on
the river Rhur in Westphalia. From thence it was carried to
Prague, and when Count Konigsmark took that city in 1648,
it fell into his hands. The Count sent it as a present to Queen
Christiana, who deposited it in the Royal Library at Stockholm.
The MS. did not remain there long, but went out of the
kingdom with Isaac Voss in 1655. Whether it came info his
possession honestly, is still uncertain ; many have unhesitatingly
accused him of appropriating it to himself without leave. But
the probability is that the Codex was presented to him by the
queen, who was his patron and friend.* While in his hands,t
his uncle Francis Junius, the great northern philologist trans*
cribed and printed it together with a version in Anglo-Saxon. :|:

But the MS. was shortly destined to find its way back into
Sweden. When Puffendorf (probably Esaias) was travelling
in Holland in 1662, hearing that it was in the possession of
Voss, he purchased it for the Count Magnus Gabriel de la
Gardie, at the price of four hundred rix dollars.<^ The Count
had it bound in silver, and in 1669 he presented it ' to the
library of the university of Upsal, where it now remains.

* Hug says that the Swedish account of the matter in the Transac-
tions of the Societ. Scient U|)salieD8is is to be preferred. See also
Askenholz Memoires de la Reine Christine. Tom. I. § 307.

t Jacobus Grimm. Hymnonim Veteris Ecclesiae XXV. Interpretatio
tbeotiaca nunc primum edita. Gottingae, 1830. p. 2.

X Ctuatuor D. N. Jesu Christi evangeliorum vereiones perantiquae
duae Gothica scilicet et Anglo-Saxonica, etc. Dordrechti typis et
sumptibuB Juoianis, 1665.

§ Accounts differ with regard to the sum paid. It is variously
stated at 500, 600, and 800 rix dollars, and even as high as 2000
ducats.

308 Moeso^Gothic Language. [Oct.

With it, he sent an exact copy by Derrer (a monk at WerdeD,)
which was destroyed by the great fire at Upsal in 1708.

The MS. is called, as before observed, the Codex Argeoteus
from its letters ; which are beautiful uncial characters of siiTer
on purple colored parchment of a quarto form. The ibilowiog
account of its present state is given by Hug. '^ The initial
lines of the Gospels and the first line of every section are in
gold letters. Below, between columns drawn in barbarous
taste according to neither of the known orders of architecture,
are inserted the Canons of Eusebius, and at the side are appen*
ded the numbers referring to them. The Gospels are in the
following order : Matthew, Jolm, Luke, Mark. The letters
do not appear to have been written with a pen or reed, but to
have been impressed by means of carved or cast stamps, nearly
in the same way as book-binders put titles upon the backs of
books in gold or silver. The perfect uniformity of the letters,
the indentations which they make in the page, the traces ojf
paste sometimes visible between the silver and the parchment —
render such a supposition credible, whatever may be said to the
contrary by hasty travellers and superficial observers."* Tlie
MSS. at Brescia and Verona which are written in silver, and
the fragments of Matthew in the Vatican, have no indentations,
nor any appearance of paste.f

The second fragment discovered, is called the Codex
Carolinus, and is a palimpsest. It was detected by Knittel
Archdeacon of Wolfenbiittel, Duchy of Brunswick, in 1756,
while examining a MS. of the Origines of Isidore, written in
Spain about the ninth century, he found that there was an older
writing beneath. After great labor and care, he made out
fragments of the Epistle to the Romans, in the same language
and character as the Codex at Upsal, with a Latin version old-
er than Jerome's by the side of the text. The following frag-
ments were discovered. Rom. II: 33, 34, 35, 36 ; 12: 1--^
and 17—21 ; 13: 1—5 ; 14: 9—26 ; 15: 3—13. They were
first published by Knittel and afterwards by Ihre, Buscbing,
and Zahn.|

* Hug's Introd. p. 285.

t Ibid. p. 28G. See also Hornets Inrro<l. Vol. III. p. 241, and in ttie
Bibliographical Appendix, Pt. I. c. I. Sect. V. § 4. [II.] will be found a
list of editions.

\ It was called the Codex Carolinus in honor of Charles the reigning
Duke of Brunswick, at the time of the discovery of ilic MS.

1838.] , Moeso-Gothic Language. 309

The indefatigable Angelo Maio discovered^ beneath the
Homilies of Gregory the Great on Ezekiel, a MS. of the eighth
century, fragments of all Paul's Ep'tstles except to the Thessa-
lonians. A second MS. of the ninth century, containing Jerome's
exposition of Isaiah, was found to conceal Gothic relics of the
same epistles with the same omissions. He afterwards brought
to light a portion of Matthew, supplying a chasm in the Codex
Argenteus. These with other Gothic fragments of a calendar,
of the Old Testament, and a Homily, were published by Maio
and Count Castiglione in 1819.*

The other relics of the language are few, and comparatively
of slight importance, as they contain no new words. We give
a brief account of them below.

1. A deed of sale at Naples which was discovered in recent
times ; it was once preserved in the archives of the Church St.
Annunciata, but is now in the Royal Library, at Naples. It
bears no date, but appears to have been written soon after the
invasion of Italy by the Goths, probably about 551. The
priests of the Church St. Anastasiaf bought some land, and the
contract is subscribed and attested in both Latin and Gothic.
These documents are chiefly valuable on account of the certain*
ty which they add to the genuineness of the Codex Argenteus.
Of the four Gothic attestations one is given below with a Latin
translation.

Gr. Ik merila bokareis handau meinai ufmelida jah andn(emum)
L. Ego merila librarius manu mea subscripsi et accepimus

skilliggans .1. jah faurthis thairh kaytsjon jah mith dia(kona) (ala)-
solidos 60 et antea per cautionemet cum Diakono —

modal unsaramma jah mithgahlaibim unsaraiin audnemum (skilig])-
— nostro et comministris nostris accepimus soli-

§ans. RK. wairth thizc saiwe.
OS 120 prctium horum paludum.^

2. Deed of sale at Arezzo, written on papyrus ; a contract
in barbarous Latin between a Deacon Gotlieb and another Dea-
con Alamud. Among several Latin subscriptions we find but

• For further particulars, see Hug's Introd. p. 286 — 7.

f Aclisie Grotice Sancte Anastasie.

t There is great uncertainty with regard to the meauing of this
word. See Zahn's Gothiiicben Sprachiiberreste in Neapel uod
Arezzo p. 48 — 53.

§ Zahn's Ulphilas. Introd. p. 76—7.

SIO Moeio-Gothic Language. [Oct.

one Gothic. The original document was of the same age with
the Title Deed at St. Annunciata, but it is no longer extant.
We copy from Zahn the only Gothic attestation.

G. Ik guthilub' dkn* the frabauhta boka fhun mis
L. Ego Gottlieb Diakonus haec vendidi librum a me

gaw^aurhta thus dkn* alamoda fidwor unkjana hug*ses kahallaija
feci tibi Diakone Alamod quatuor uncias fundi cabaUam

jah killimuis 'RLGr* and*nahm jah ufmeb'da.
et soUdos 133 accepi et subscripsi.*

It will be seen that both the documents given above are im-
perfect. They are both written in a much more negligent and
careless manner than the Codex Argenteus.

All else that remains of the Gothic language which has yet
been discovered is extremely insignificant.^

Before we come to the consideration of the Gothic language,
it will be necessary to digress a little from our path, and give
some account of the Germanic languages, and their mutual con-
nection.

The German or Teutonic languages may be divided into two
great branches : viz., the Scandinavian, which includes the Ice-
landic, Danish, Swedish, and Norwegian languages and their
various dialects ; and the German Proper, subdivided in turn
into two classes, distinguished, the one by its harshness and ful-
ness, and the other by its softness and flexibility. The rougher
and more energetic of these tongues is called the Upper Ger-
manic (Hoch-Deutsch) because spoken in the upper or moun-
tainous parts of Germany ; while the other, the Lower Ger-
manic, (Platt-Deutsch) the more euphonious, receives its name
from being used in the low or flat parts of the same country. To
the Upper belong the Gothic, Allemannic and Francic, now
extinct, with the modern High Gennan and its dialects. From
the lower came the Anglo-Saxon, the Friesic, the Old Saxon,
and through them, the English, the Dutch, the Flemish, and
the present dialects of northern Germany. We have seen thai
the iTlphilanic version received the name of Moeso-Crothic from

* Zahn'B Ulpliilas. Introd. p. 78.

t There are also a few Gothic words found in the Viaigotbic and
Ostrogotbic Laws, and in the Gothic historiaiia. Buabeck^ Leiten
on the Goths in the Crimea likewise contain some Gothic worda^ and
the beginning of a song. ^See Zahn. p. 78^-80.

1838.] Moeso-Gothic Language. 311

the settlement of Moesia by the Goths^ and that this was the
first specimen of Teutonic literature. From the date of this
work, until the eighth century, nothing can be discovered bear-
ing the stamp of the High-Gennan. The MSS principally
contained Slavish translations of the church Latin, formed not
only on the Latin construction, but following also its inflection.
The High-German dialects then in use, as we have mentioned,
were the AUemannic or Suabian, and the Francic. The former
was written by Kero, Rhabanus Maurus, Notker, etc : the
latter by Isidore, and others. The Francic seems to occupy an
intermediate space between the two classes of Germanic lan-
guages ; but as its spirit rather resembles that of the High-Ger-
man, it is ranked under its head. It will be seen, then, that
there are no relics of the High-German languages for a space of
three hundred years.

The most interesting of the Low German dialects, from the
perfectness of its preservation, its literature, its connection with
our native tongue, and its relation to the Moeso-Gothic, is the
Anglo-Saxon. The earliest specimen of this language is found
in the laws of Ethelbert, king of Kent, written about A. D. 600.
Some writers however have awarded the palm of priority to the
Poem of Beowulf, the Traveller's Song. But in the oldest
MS. of it which is extant, there are allusions to a period subse-
quent to the year 600. In its original composition, it was pro-
bably much older ; perhaps about A. D. 450, and a hundred
years later than the Gothic version. Marshall's Gospels in
Anglo-Saxon, was published with the Moeso-Gothic translation,
by Junius, the northern philologist, who added to the work a glos-
sary of both languages. His scholar, Hickes, followed in his
steps, and confounded them together, in which error he was fol-
lowed by Lye. But the An^Io-Saxon and Moeso-Gothic have
no nearer relation, than the Greek and Latin, or Hebrew and
Arabic, and it is surprising that a scholar of the acuteness of
Junius should have treated of them as sister dialects. It was
not until Rask published his Anglo-Saxon Grammar, that the
proper connection between the two languages was understood,
and the Anglo-Saxon torn from the shackles of the Latin, and
given its proper place as a Low German dialect.

Before we come to the immediate consideration of the Moeso-
Gothic, it may be well to premise that there is not enough re-
maining of that language to form an accurate grammar or lexi-
con. The literature too exists in the form of a literal transla-

312 MoesO'Qothic Ijonguage. [Oct.

tion, thereby forbidding the true spirit of the language to show
itself untrammelled. In this respect the Anglo-Saxon is much
more fortunate. For although a great part of its liteFature b
found in translations, poetry, original prose, and paraphrase are
extant to sufficiently display the more remarkable peculiarities
of its idiom, as well as its richness and copiousness.

It has been generally supposed that the Moeso-Gothic was
the prevalent High-German of the day. But there are strong
reasons for doubting this. The remarkable difference between
the Moeso-Gothic, and the oldest relic of the other Higb-Ger-
man dialects, — a difference not merely to be accounted for by
the supposed changes, and abbreviations which any lauguage
might undergo in the space of three hundred and 6fty years —
proves that the time when the High-German divided itself into
dialects was far earlier than the days of Ulphilas. A compari-
son of the Lord's Prayer in Moeso-Gothic, and Allemanoic of
720, will show the truth of our assertion.

Crothic. Atta* unsar, thu in himinam. Weihnai namo

AUemannic. Fatter unseer, thu pist in Himele. Wihi Namun

thein. Qulmai thiudinassua thcins. Wairthai wilja thelns, swe io
deinan; Chweme Rihi din; Werde willo din, so in

himina, jah ana airthai. Hlaif unsarana thana sinteinan gif una
Himile, sosa in Erdu ; Proath unseer emezhic kip uns

himmadaga. Jah aflet uns thatei skulans sijaima, swaswe jah weis
hiutu ; Oblaz uns sculdi unseero, so wir

afletam thaim skulam unsaraim. Ja ni briggais uns in fraistubnjaL
oblazen Skuldikem uns ; Enti ni firletti unsih in Khorunka ;

Ah lausei uns af thamma ubilin.
Uzz erlosi unsih fona Ubile.t

On the other hand it is asserted by some, that the Moeso-
Gothic is a mixture of High and Low German, with some
foreign, perhaps Thracian words.| Adelung and his supporteis,
acknowledged when they classed it under the head of High-
German (Hoch-Deutsch) languages, that it was in many respects
closely connected with the Low-German (Platt-Deutsch ;) and
the introduction of all strange words is accounted for by the

* Fadur is legitimate Gothic. See Castiglione'a CJIphil. Goth. Yen.
ad Corinth. Sec. p. VI. and 79.

t AdeluDg'e Mithridates, Vol. II. p. 185 and 194.

I Encycl. Americana. Art Qerman Language.

1838.] Moeso-OotMc Language. 818

supposed emigrations beyond the Baltic, and by the intercourse
with the Suiones already there. In which case, as Count
Castiglione remarks, it would follow that the Suio-Gothic ap-

1)roaches nearer to the Moeso-Gothic than any other Teutonic
anguage, which does not happen. It was the opinion of
Fulda, in which the Count concurs, that the Gothic did not ob-
tain its foreign words from any German race, nor indeed that
the Gothic belongs to any peculiar German dialect, inasmuch
as it is impossible to decide to which class of languages it makes
the nearest approach. And this he thinks may have happened
in one of two ways. Either the Gothic, as the Latin after-
wards, became the mother of many cognate languages, and al-
though many words are lost, the present language is perceptible
in each by numerous relics ; or, on the contrary, the Gothic
language may have been formed from the juncture of many
Gothic tribes !*

There is still another theory opposed to both of the former
ones, supported by Balbi, and odiers, who rank the Moeso-
Gothic among the Scandinavian languages.! But Balbi, and the
class of comparative philologists to which he belongs, have been
contented to seek for mere verbal coincidences without taking
into consideration the grammatical structure of a language. Yet,
the most unphilosophical observer cannot fail to perceive that if
the inflection and syntactical arrangement of two languages
be wholly different, although the roots of their words be the
same, they can claim no nearer relationship than that of issuing
from the same stock at some remote age. If indeed the forms
of words in the Moeso-Gothic place it under the head of the
Scandinavian languages, (which we very much doubt,) a moment's
comparison of the grammatical changes and the structure of sen-
tences in the Moeso-Gothic, and any Scandinavian dialect will
convince us that the genius of the one is widely different from
that of the other.

What then is the Moeso-Gothic, and what are its relations to
the other Teutonic languages ?

From the unabbreviated form in which the language exists,
we are inclined to think that it is much older than has been gen-
erally supposed. Why may it not have stood in the same re-
lation to the spoken Gothic, as the Sanskrit to the spoken dialects

• Ulphil. Goth. Vers, ad Cor. 11. Ded. p. iv— v.
f Atlas £tbnogniphique. Tab. XIII.

Vol. XII. No. 32. 40

314 MoesO'Oothic Language. [Oct.

of India ? In its grammatical inflections it stands aside fioni all
the Germanic languages now known ; it has a dual ; and like the
Scandinavian languages, a passive voice. The regularity, and
indeed, the perfection, of its structure entitle it to a much high-
er regard than the Anglo-Saxon ; and it is absurd to suppose
that this order and beauty were obtained from a mixture of the
dialects of all the Gothic tribes. Besides, no philological prin-
ciples yet discovered can support an opinion thus contravening all
known facts in the formation of languages. Who could have
decided from what particular idiom the phrases to be employed
should be selected ? Ulphilas, certainly, could not have had the
presumption to invent an alphabet, and then to make a language
to suit : if he did, he was certainly the most successful of experi-
menters, and no wonder that his language is a puzzle to phi-
lologists !

The only position, then, with regard to the Moeso-Gothic,
which seems in any degree tenable, is that of Count Castig-
lione ; viz. that the Gothic was the parent of the Cvermanic
languages. There is no word in the Gothic, which may not
be found in some of the Teutonic, that is, Crermanic and Scan-
dinavian languages. It bears, too, evident marks of having flour-
ished previous to the time when the Low and High German di-
alects arose — the peculiarities of enunciation, which distinguish
these classes, are not observable — or at least they did not find
their way into the Gothic writings, and not until the exact epoch
is known when the Gothic was exclusively used throughout the
North of Europe, can any calculation be made of the antiqui-
ty of these dialects.

But there can be no uncertainty with regard to the value of
the M oeso-Gothic language as preserved in the code of Ulphilas.
in the precision, multiplicity, and freedom of form both of con-
jugation and declension, it equals if it does not surpass the
Greek : it bears an equal impress of antiquity, — its changes are
equally regular — its facility of compounding is equally wonder-
ful, having a formative power almost unappreciable except by a
German scholar. The copiousness and richness of its vocabu-
lary, with its remarkable capability for expressing nice shades
of meaning, peculiarly adapted it to the purposes of translation.
But we labor under a great disadvantage in possessing the
Gothic only in the form of a translation, as it is impossible to
judge so fully of the whole force of the language as an original
composition would have placed it in our power. In a transia-

1838.] Gcfwineneu of Matthew I. U. 315

tioo, violeDce is done both to the original and the language into
which the translation is made. The multiplicity of synonyme^,
the taste and consistency of metaphor, and the varieties in the
forms of phraseology, traits particularly showing the genius of
a language, and always manifest in every original production,
cannot be brought forward in the language into which the trans-
lation is made. Yet aU this does not deteriorate from the worth
of the Moeso-Gothic as a philosophic language. One of the
most valuable links in the chain of Indo-Germanic languages,
it develops important principles, and its value for grammatical
reference cannot be too highly appreciated.

Very little has as yet been done towards the cultivation of
this interesting language, and, indeed, many educated men are
not aware of its existence in a separate form. In the general
awakening which seems to be taking place throughout our land
with regard to the nortliem languages, we hope that the Moeso-
Gothic will receive^ its due share of attention. While the An-
glo-Saxon, the mother of our own native tongue is cultivated,
may her elder sister not be neglected !

ARTICLE IV.

Inquiry respcctino the Original Language of Mat-
thew's Gospel, and the Genuineness of the first
TWO Chapters of the same ; with particular refer*
ENCE TO Mr. Norton's View of these Subjects as ex-
hibited in uis Treatise on the Genuineness of the
Gospels.

Bj M. Stoart, Prof. Sw. Lit. Tbool. Sem. Andarer.

^ 7. Introductory RemarJcs.

In the preceding number of this Miscellany I have examined
at length the position, that the Gospel of Matthew was origi-
nally written in Hebrew, and that our present canonical Mat-
thew is only a Greek translation of the original. It is possible,
indeed, that this position is true ; but the sum of the evidence
before us, when thoroughly examined, seems to render it highly
improbable.

816 Oemdnenets of Matthew I. IL [Oct.

Mr. Norton, who rejects the 6rst two chapters of our canoni-
cal Matthew because he deems them to be an interpolation, has
prepared the way for the introduction of this opinion, by main-
taining that tlie Original Gospel of Matthew was in Hebrew.
He had his reasons for so doing. The state of the testimony
before us, in regard to the two chapters in question, is such as
makes the case desperate for those who impugn their genuine-
ness, if the Greek Matthew is to be relied on as the source of
evidence. This we shall see in the sequel. Consequently, if
there be any room for suspicion as to the Genuineness of Mat-
thew I. II., it must be sought for in the Hebrew editions of this
Gospel. Now as the church has nerer heard any thing of
these since about the beginning of the fifth century, excepting
a few fragments that some of the fathers have preserved,
conjecture has room apparently for a wide range ; and at any
rate it is freed from the danger of being overthrown by positive
evidence drawn from the Gospel accordii\2j to the Hebrews.
It is not until we come down to the times of Epiphanius, near
the close of the fourth century, that we can find more than
some four or five extracts from the Jewish Gospel, which
enable us to form any decisive judgment as to its internal state
or condition.

Mr. Norton uses very freely the liberty which this state of
things seems to afiTord him. He tells us (p. liii), that Matthew
I. II. was at first a separate composition — an ^vangelium In-
fantiae published by some curious inquirer into the early history
of the Saviour ; and that this, from its seemingly obvious
congruity with the history of Jesus's public life as given us by
Matthew, i. e. from its supplementary nature, >K'as first written
separately on the same Ms, with the Gospel, and finally in-
corporated with it. In that state the Greek translator found bb
Ms. or Mss. to be, and he rendered the whole into the Greek
language, as belonging to one and the same author.

But what are the facts on which this very important deduc-
tion or proposition is built? Mr. Norton has not told us what
they are ; at least he has given us no external evidence what-
ever of a historical nature. No voice of antiquity is raised in
favour of such an opinion. No hint of this kind any where
appears. The two cliapters under examination were indeed
omitted, as Epiphanius avers, in the Gospel of the Ebionites.
But instead of an intimation that there was any good reason (or

1838.] Oenmneness of Matthew L II. 317

omitting them, this father expressly calls such Gospel of theirs
vivo^BVfjkivov nal ii%gcjTfjgiaafiiifOv, adulterated and curtailed.
Intemal grouDds of suspicion, however, are to be found in
the chapters aforesaid, according to the views of Mr. Norton.
It is on these, and on these only, that he builds his opinion.
These, therefore, claim our attention ; and in the sequel they
must be examined. But before we come to this part of our
task, it will be important to show the reader what the actual
state of evidence is, in regard to the chapters before us. This
I shall now endeavour to do.

^ 8. Positive evidence establishing the genuineness of

Matthew 1. IL

(1) All Ms. copies of Matthew the world over^ and all the
Undent Versions udthout an exception, contain the first two
chapters of Matthew, and exhibit them as part of his Gospel.

The only exception to this remark is, that some two or three
Mss. are defective, i. e. have perished, at the beginning of
Matthew's Gospel. Thus the Codex Bezae or Cantab, wants
the first twenty verses in Matthew, and Cod. Eschenbach. at
Niirnberg has a like defect. Both unquestionably exhibited the
genealogy in their original state.

The time was, in the days of Griesbach, when it was given
out that the Codex Ebner. (Cod. 105 apud Wetstenium) did
not contain the genealogy in Matthew. But this was a mis-
take ; which was rectified by Gabler in his Journal fiir Theol.
Lit., 1801, part. 6. Schoenleben, who published a minute
account of this Ms., gave occasion to this report by saying in
his Expose : * Primum caput A his verbis incipit, toS di 'Jrjaov
yhvvfi^ivtog. It is true, indeed, that %i(paXaiov A., i. e. Chap.
I., does so begin. But there is another truth respecting matters
of this kind, which shows that there is not a particle of weight
in the testimony derived from this, in favor of the omission of
the two first chapters of Matthew, but the contrary. ^' All the
books of the New Testament," says Griesbach (Comm. Crit.
IL p. 49), <^ omit the numbering of the first paragraph in any
book .... Thus, in all the Ccxlices of Matthew which are
furnished with thXoi [i. e. titles, short contents], %t(puXctiov A>
or chap. I., begins with Matthew 2: 1, and is entitled mgl xeiv
Maycavy So in Mark the first %iq)(iXaiov begins with Mark 1:
29 ; in Luke with 2: 1 ; in John with t: 1 ; in the Epistle to

318 Genuineness of Matthew L EL [Oct.

the Romans with 1: 18; and so of the rest. A matter of fad
plain enough, indeed, but one which, if it bad been earlier
noticed, would have saved some critics not a little of empty
declamation.

John Williams, who in 1789 published a second editkxi of
his Free Inquiry into the Authenticity of the first and second
Chapters of Matthew^ s Gospel, boldly avers that some of the
old Latin Codices omit these chapters. It turns out, on investi-
gation, to be nothing more than that some Codices place the
genealogy by itself, as a kind of pre&ce to the whole wovk.
Thus the Codex Harleiianus, written perhaps in the seventh
century, at the end of Matt. 1: 17, contains the following words
inserted by the copyist : Genealogia hucusque. Then, as a
heading to the sequel, he adds : Incipit Eoangelium secundum
Matthaeum. Doubtless these notices were taken into the body
of the work, from the margin of some older copy. They are
evidently notes which are essentially marginal in their very
nature.

A few other Latin Codices, mostly written in Ireland duriag
the 10th, lltb, and 12th centuries, in like manner arrange the
genealogy in the way of a proem, after which they introduce
titular matter before verse 18th of Matt. I., which commences
the regular narration. But all this shows nothing more tbaa
the hand of some critical redactor, who wished the reader to
make a distinction between a genealogical table of names, and
what might be appropriately named the Gospel or lEstory
of Jesus.

Other Latin Codices older and better, all the Syriac, Coptic,
and other versions, in all their copies, and finally all the Greek
copies without any variation, exhibit the chapters in question.

So far then as it respects any evidence actually in being,
either fix)m Mss. or Versions, there is not one copy of either
upon the face of the whole earth, which is known to be want-
ing as to Matthew I. II.

The case then is absolutely desperate, on critical ground.
We may conjecture what we please, I admit ; but conjecture
can never stand in the place of plain and palpable fiicts, when
the discussion turns upon a point of lower criticism. To
the Mss., and to the Versions — is the answer always to be made
to every inquiry of this nature. Coiyecture is allowable only
where these fail us.

We might stop here, then, and consider the discussion as at

183&] Oentdmness of Matthew 1. U. 819

an end. We might lawfully do so. But, as Jerome sometimes
says, ID a dispute, that he will do this or that ex abundantif ia
order that nothing may be omitted which the nature of the case
will enable him to bring forward ; so, in the present case, I will
adduce other evidence to confirm more completely what is al*
ready substantially proved.

(2) 77^6 two first chapters of Matthew have always belong'
ed to his Greek Gospel^ (and no other genuine Gospel^ as we
have seeUy can be rendered probable), ever since it came into
circulation.

I will not occupy the time of the reader ip making quotations
to prore thb, from Jerome, Augustine, Epiphanius, Origen,
Clement of Alexandria, nor even Irenaeus and Tertullian. No
one who has any candour and any tolerable acquaintance with
these writers, and with others who were their contemporaries,
will venture to deny or even to doubt, that they have quoted
and often quoted the two first chapters of Matthew as a part of
his Gospel.

I advance at once, therefore, to Justin Martyr, who brings us
close upon the confines of the apostolic age.

Mr. Norton has laboured, and very much to the purpose, to
show that Justin quoted our canonical Gospels. I aver, that
he has quoted Matthew 1. II., in such a way as to make it cer-
tain, tl)at the Gospel of Matthew in his hands was the same
with that which we now have. My proof of this is an exhibi-
tion of his quotations ; which are arranged as found in Credner's
BeitrdgCy p. 151 seq.

Dial. c. Tryph. 100. p. 195. Matt. 1: 1—17.

Fwimg ovtoy [top X^unir] nQtnvtOKOV fih tov Bi§Xof ynivutf'lifirov
^cov, xffi ni^ nitxwp t&r xiurftaftaVf ttal xw Xqttnov^ viov Javtd^
natQutQZ^ vtoy, inudij S ta rtig ano yi- vlov ^AlSgaafu
vovg avT&v nagS'ivov cagtionoifi&tlg. — 'A^gaafi i/irvrjaB top

viop ovp ap&Qtanov iavtop sXtyfp, fjtot ^laaax • *Iaai» Sb —

ano tvg ytnniiftt^ t^C dia na o^ipov^ — * Tanijfi 5i iyspptjtn
f} T I c ^ y, tag ^(f^t ano tov napio^ %ai Iaxt»p, top Iwniq>, top a p~
nal *Ttraatij not ^AJjQaafA yipovg * rj dui to tlpai 3ga Maglag, i^ fjg
aitoP top 'AfigaafA ntxtiga ttal tovtatp tap pa- iytmn^dir^ ^Irjtrovg.
rrigi^gtflfdpiayf i^ mp uatay^h t; Mag la
to yipo^, Kal yag natigag tup ytppugnip»p taXg &v^
yatgivkP ait&p tinpmp tovg tAp &filt»tip /trr^to-
gmg imctifit^a.

820

Oenuinene$$ of Matthew L 11.

[Oct

Dial. cTr. 4a p. 139.

Ibu 45. p. 141.

Dial. c. Tr. 120. p. 313 seq.

Jtfyu (o ^toq) %if*IfTaa%* (Grenea. 22: 18) wall tvkopi&^^tnnntu hfwf
4mU^unl irov niarta xa t&mi jijg ytig, tf di *Iamap * (Genea. 2ft 14)
nul svloyftdiiinrtai h (rol namn ai qwXat tiig /^(, *al tw t£ imifftmti
oov * ovMtti tovto f f *HattV, ovdi t^ 'Povfitft li/u^ oldi all^ T<ra^ siT
4M9ipoit 4^ wp tfulXev ^tno&ai Kara triw omorofdmff t^p J&a xiic
naff^ipov Maqiag, o Xqyaxog, JEfyBwitiiv nfiayiaw^Iai'dm
(Genea. 49: 10) KotTafiad-otff tdoig aw^ o Xiym * fif^i(nw /o^ to fnti^pm

Apol. I. 33. p. 64.
<Comp. Difld. 66, 163. 63, 160. 85,
181. Apol. L 63, 82. etc.)

&ilir6fUPog dui TOV HadSSov (7: 14)
n^oeqpi^Tfiv^, axovaast, *EXix^
Hi ovt^ *

*IdoVf { na^&iweg h ywrtifi t^
waX Ts^nm vior* wX iowkftp inl

Tip oyO^MtU «tVIOU, /I€i7 «t|UCiir O

Apol. 1. 33. p. 64.

Kok xaXiaBig to orofia aitov ^Ifj"
4row* ainog yiq a»ffii Tor loop
«UTai) ano tmp afUiguAp mnUp,

Matt. 1. II.

Matth. 1: 22. &« icJlijflM^J to ^
^ey vnro toS irv^^ ^la tov ir0i^n»-
Tov itc^^oyro;*

^JdoVf ^ fra^^ro; Ir ;^a0T^< Q^
Kffi TifffTcti t4or, KO* mtlevowi lo
Syo/itf avrov*J^^ifiairoviji* o itni Qw-
^c^/i^evo/MToy], ^itd^ ly/MSv o ^«a&

Matt 1: 21.

KtMi MoUtnig to oyofia aiTov */^
O'ovy* «vio( ^a^ (tomfm tov Ioof
avfov a«o a(Ma^$&p uinmp»

Apol. 1. 34. p. 65.

^Onov di xtu tiig y^g Ytmmtr&at
^ufUsy, mg nQOMttw tt9Qogn(fO<pfitrfg
c Mixtdag^ axowraiBy squi di ovi^ '
{5: 2) Kal av Btf&Xufij yfj *Jovda^
ovSafi&g iXaxlfrtri el iv tolg ^/Bfio-
otv'lovda' ix aov yaq S^aiUttrcTat
^yoviutpog^ wrug uo^ivpu top Xaop

/lOV.

Mattb. 2: 5, 6u

Ovf 60 yitQ yiyf^astmh Sia tov
917TOV * Kal av Bij&ltifi^ y^ '/ovd«,
ovdcift&g ilazifrtfi f? If to!; ^/^in^
trip *Iovda ' in aov ya^ i^dLMvana*
^yovfupog^ oat^g iroi^umi tot Imp
liOVf top 'Jv^ffifJU

lasa]

Qenuinenesi of Matthew I. U.

331

Dial. c. Tr. 77, 78. \\ 174 seq.

^Autt T^ y9¥pri&ijvtt$ avrov,
fwyoi imo 'Aofafllag naQa/i-

gop iX&oyxtq ngog 'Hgwdrptj
Tor iv tfi y? vfi^y tort (iatnltv-
ovta, — OvTog o fiatrilBt/g ^HQtoSriq,
($a^itp naga t&p nQ&rfivngmr rov
Xaov Vfi&y, rou iX&ortnv ngbg av-
t09t&p ano *A^^afilui fiiymif
JUKI unarrmf' ii imiQog xav iy
1^ ovqapf ^arinog i)rrwti»at,
ou fiwrdwg Ytyiwritah h x^ x^9
«^wr, jcvi i^l&ojup nqoawtniirai orv-
TOff. [Ck»mp. Dial. c. Tr. 106. p.
201. 'ApondXcanoe ow nal ip
ovQttpf &f/La tf ytvpn^ti-
pat aifjop ictiffog, ig yi-
ygrnnou h zdig inoftimiftapiifAatnp
%mp inwnilMP crvrov, o\ ano
*A6(afilag ftayoi ix tovtov iin-
yporregf naqiyivovxo %ai ngoatxv-
prjaap avr<S.] xal ip Bti&M/i riSr
ngtaPviigiop wnovtwp^ oxt yiyqan-

Matt. 2: 1 — 13.

2: 1. Tov di ^Tiyrov ytpptf^iyxog h

Br^^ltifi xr,g *Iovdalag^ tdov^ fiuyoi

ano avaxoX&v naQtyiporto. — 3:

3. *Axova(ig di 'llQwdfjg o fiaaiXitg

haqax^'t*

2: 4. Kai trvpayayitp naptag xolg

aqx^^ *f>^ ygai^kaxiig xov Xaov,

inw^dptxo nag avx&Py nov o Xqv-

vxog ytppatai.

2 : 1, 2. fiayoi — Xiyopifg' nov

iaxip 0 xtx^fU ficuTiXevg x&p *Iov^

damp ; tSdo/up yig avroij top av-

xiga ip ipotoX^f $taX i^X&ofUP ngoff"

9 m

xvpiiimi tti/f^.

2: 5. Ol de (a^/M^cTc ^ ygaftfia-
xtig) tbzop avt^ • *Ep Bti&XufA ifjf

tM ip x^ nQoq>fjixfi cvwg * (Micah *Tov9aiag * ouxm yaq yiyganxa^ dia

5: 2.) ** Kai ah Stf&Xtif/t yij ^Jovda, xov UQOiprfJov * Kal av Bti&L «. 1. 1.

ovdafi&g iXaxiaxri el h xolg fiytfio-

avp lovda ' ix aov yaq ^Elevovrai

f^yovntpog, oax^g noi/Aapel xov Xaov
ftovJ* Twvano ^AJf^afiiag ovp

2: 11,12. Kal iX^6pttg{oi ftayoi)

ftayoip iXd-opxwf %lg Bif&Xdfi^ xal ' Big itjv otxUtPf tJdop xb natdhp fi»-
ngoaxvpTiaavxafP xo naidlov^ xal xa Maglag tt/c lAfjxgog aiftov * xal
ngoatptyxavxtop aix^ d&ga^ xq^^op ntaopxeg ngoaoevpijaap avt^ * xal
xal Xlfiapop xal afAvgopop' inttSfj apol^apxtg xovg ^^avgovg avt&p
xaxa anoxaXvytiPy (Atxi xo ngodivtyxapavx^dHga^xif^^t^
ngoaxvpfjirai xop naida ip BTi&Xtifi Xifiopop, xal auvopav. Kalxg^lfu*-
itaXtva&riaap fjifi inapiX&&p ngog i xur^ipxtg xax opog^ fitf apaxafii/fat
xop 'Hgi&dfiP * xal *JwrTiq> di^ 6 x^p ngog 'HgMtip^ dl aXXr^g odov apt-

Maglop fufipfjaxevfupog, povXti-
&$lg ngoxegop ixflaXilp xiip
fiptfaxrip avx^ Magiitfi, po-

ymgrjaap^ $tg xtip x^Q**^ avtnp, —
Matt. 1: 18 seq. Mpijaxsv^eiafig yag
xijg fAfjxgog avtov Maglag xS '/o»-
(nj<py [nglp ^ avptl&up avxovg] «u-

fdSnp iyxvuoptlp alxftP ano avpov^

elag apdgog, xavi hnip ano nog- \ gi&ij ip yaaxgl ^ovtro ix nptvfio^

pUag, dt ogafiaxog xexiXivaxo ' xog aylov. ^Imaij^p Si o ipfig av^

ixfiaXBlpxfiP yvpoixaaitov, xtig, dlxaiog mp xal jui^ ^iXviP

Vol. XII. No. 32. 41

332

Oenuinenea of Matthew L U.

[Oct.

loVfOXi in nrsifiatog iylov
0 tx*^ »ata /cfO'Tpoc itrtiP.

aixfjw naqu9%tyfiaxica%f
ifiovlti^ la&Qa inoHHrtu avriw.
Tavta di amw ip&vfui^imKj !^r,
ayytlog xvgiov »az opa^ i^p^ni
avT^ liymw * '/cMnj^ i^og ^afi^
fi^ ^pofiii&fjg naQoXafiuw Ma^ut^
njy yvraixci aov * to /a^ ir tmf
ywni&9¥ ix npwitaiog iertv a/Uiv.
; Matt. 1: 34. Jityi(f»dg ^< o */c*-
• ofifp uno Tov VTirov inoitftnV', ^

avtrfp.

Dial. c. Tr. 78. p. 175.

I Matt 2: 13.

Kal ainog (u'/oNr?)^) a/uo t§ Ma- — idov, S/ytlof nv^iov tpahawa

gltf Mlavercfi i^tl&up dg Myvnrtor, mit Svag t^ '/cwriy^i Xe/tir ' ^^'c^

Kai thai iuti u/m t^ Jiiiidl^, ^XQ^ ^'^ na^aXafit to natdiow utu fify

ay ovTo!; irailiy airoKoAv^^^ ^nro- (trfri^a «vtoD, Kcri 9ei);^€ m^ ./41/vir-

y<Jl«^c2y ec( Tt;y *Jwdaiay. toy, iced £7<^« &e<^ £»( ar ^kai iroj.

Matt. 2: 16— 1&

Tott'HQfidiig IdWf on iro(aix&^
' vno T&p (ittynv, i&vfuu&ii iicrr *
' xal inotntilaq awuls narrow tou;

naldag tovg h Bri^luu xul iw jcairi
. joiq OQloig avxTfg^ ano dieroTg wm
. xaroire'^o), noTa rovxQovoPj op i*^

Dial. c. Tr. 78. p. 175.

Kail 0 'H^tadfig fiii ijtaytl&inwp
nqog ctitop t&y ano ^A^^afliag
fia/i»r, ig ^^Iwrw atftovg noiijaai^
iJiXtt Muxa ta xtXtw&irja atrto'ig
o* cUJLffg ooov tig Ttjy /ctf^af av~
t&9 analXayiyTWfy xa« rov 'ioKr^<p
Sfiarfj Maqlq xa« t^j naidUj^, &g
Ko* avioig anoHtxaXvmo^ ^^ iltk-
^irtmt ug Jfyvmopf ov yirwcinap
top ttatda^ OP iXr^v&turap n^oauv^
p^<ra$ ol fuiyoif napxag anXwg
xovg naldag, xohg ip Btjd^lfifi,
itdlswrBP ap€U(^t&rjpai ' jtal xovxo
inatgoif^ivTo (dXXnp ylpur&ai dia
ItQtfdoVf dttopxog di avxov lov
aylov nvtvuaxog ovjwg* (31:15.)
** (Pamj ip Pofm ^xova&tif »Xav&'
fiog xal odvfffAoc noXvg' 'Paxiil
xXahwra xa xixpa avTtjg^^xal olx
fi&(X» nagaxlti&ijraij oti ovx ilaip.^ .

Dial. c. Tr. 88. p. 185.

Maffxv^iop di xal xotxo taxn vfup^ o fyt^p TtQog Vfiig ytyopipui vni xmp
A^^afilag f/iayoip, oitiPtg afia x^t ytppti&ijpai to naidi-
opf il&opitg nf^ofnxvpfioap alt^t.

TotB inl^^io^ xo ^ti&ip dia*Ii^§-
fiiov xov TT^o^i^Tov, Xiyopxog ' ^pm-
r^ ip 'Pafiif, i^xovcBi^ ^ffyvog nu
xXavdfiog xal odvQfiog nolvg ' 'Pa-
xiji tdalovaa xa xixpa avx^ «a
ovx iidtlt na^axliidiipaif oxi olx
ugLp.

1838.] Genuineness of Matthew L 11. 393

Dial. c. Tr. 102. p. 196.

Qa T&y ano A^^afllag uaywf fML^itv* Uqiad>m 6 fiaailthg %i necw
airtoVf intpoiXiwreif ivtltiv avtor ' wxl xma i^y tov &iov julswrip 'l»-
iril<p Xa^itp avjor a^a r^ Maqltj^ intjX&sp its AXyvmov*

Dial. c. Tr. 103. p. 19& I Matt. 2: 19^23.

— xoMsZ (h ^I/VJIT^) f}(ray intk-- • TVlnrnfaairos H tov 'llgtidov, Idoi^
&6vng ixa^ ^^ ani&anw 6 cnrox- ayytlog injfflov itax trag ^pidrtuu
Tilyag ta Iv BifdUifi naidla ^Hi^fi- ; t^ '/omi^^ iv Alyvmi^ Xiyutf * I-
^C) *t*i *AQx^aog alno¥ dudilono * ytff&ug noQalafit to ntudiop ntd
ual ovTog ixtltvta nfjlw top X^toroy ' ttiP jnniiqa avrov, koi noetvov uq
ti|y oixorofdopy t^w xata to povkr^- 'yr^v Icqar^i * tt&vrnitaah ya(f ol {^
fta tov natgof ytya^giivfp^ vn av^ tovrttg tt^y y^VXV^ ^^ naidlov. *0
tov, inl t^ atavQm&^pai iX^tXv, di iytf^tlg nagikapi to natdlop

xal T^ ftiftiga avrov, ual tiX^tp us
yifp* JaQatiL *A3tovcag di, Sn *Agx^og fiaetUw^ inl ti^g *Jovdtdag ip~
T» ^Hmidov tov nat^g avrov, iipofiii&fi itttl mntl&ttp * /^lyiOTiflr^itf M
Mrr oro^, iw^w^tynp ug ta (tiq^ t^q JTcdUo^ Kmu iXh-iv mantftaiasif
dg nohp Xiyoftirifp NaCa^,

If there can be an j doubt in the mind of any reader who is
able to make and does carefully make the comparison of Mat-
thew with Justin, whether the latter has cited the Evangelist
in the cases here exhibited, it would seem to me truly strange.
But that the matter may be made clearer still, let it be noted,
that in the citations from the Old Testament, where Matthew
difiers both from the Septuagint and from the Hebrew, having
probably made his own free translation, Justin has followed the
Evangelist. E. g. in Matt. 1 : 23, cited from Is. 7 : 14, the
Sept. has i¥ yaotgl X^ipiTM^ but Matthew, and after him Justin,
use the phnae ip yaotgi t(ii. The Hebrew has nfit';}]^1 oniZ
SHE shM call ; the Sept. uaXtasig, thou shalt call ; but Mat-
thew has xaXioova^, thet shall call. Justin says igova&p, using
the third person plural (although of another synonymous verb),
just as Matthew had done.

Observe again, in the quotation. Matt. 2: 5, 6, where the
Evangelbt agrees neither with the Septuagint nor with the
Hebrew, Justin follows him verbatim throughout. The Septua-
gint runs thus : '' Thou Bethlehem, hotise of Ephratah, art very
small to be among the thousands of Judah ; from thee shall go
forth for me [one] who shall be a ruler of Israel." The He-
brew runs thus : '' And thou Bethlehem Ephratah art small to

324 Gtniuinene$$ of BiaUhew L U. [Oct.

be among the thousands of Judah ; firom thee shall go forth tor
roe [one] who shall rule in Israel."

In Matthew 2: 18, where a quotation is made from Jer. 31:
15, it will be seen by comparison that Justin's quotation is
verbatim^ with the exception that ^gnpog is omitted, which has
probably fallen from Justin's text. But the Septuagint has
here ^oiinj iv 'Paftf axova&ij ^Qt^ifov^ xa! »lav^[toCf sot
'odugfiov, 'P(xx*i^ a7ioxXatofMi¥ij ovx tidiXi navaaaOai ini roii;
viofS avrfjg, oti ovx fiai' which is a mode of construction quit«
different from that in Matthew. The Hebrew original runs
thus : *^ A voice in Raniah was heard, wailing, bitter lamenta-
tion ; Rachel, weeping for her children, refuses to be comforted
respecting her children, because they are not."

Such a harmony of Justin with these minutiae of the two
6rst chapters of Matthew, and in respect to passages fiom the
Old Testament, where the Septuagint Version aflbrded the
greatest facility for the Greek quotation and yet is not adopted,
prove beyond all reasonable controversy, not only that Justin
has quoted the Gospel of Matthew, but quoted our canonical
Greelc Gospel ; and not this only as to some of the leading
parts of it, but the peculiarities of chapters I. II. even in their
nicest shades, are preserved by Justin. Indeed Mr. NoitoB
himself feels compelled to concede, that our Greek Matthew,
even in chapters I. II. is quoted by Justin ; see p. 228 of bis
work. If any reader has doubted of this, the view given Um
above must, as I think, remove all those doubts.

It is a remarkable circumstance, too, that nearly every im-

KTtant thing which is related in the first two chapters of
atthew, is referred to or actually quoted by Justin ; 90 thai
we have not merely some general and indistinct evidence, but
testimony minute and circumstantial ; and consequently there is
no room for reasonable doubt or hesitation as to Justin's having
before him our canonical Matthew.

I might add other testimony of a similar nature, which b vety
little later than that of Justin. Celsus, the celebrated heathen
philosopher and bitter enemy of Christians, flourished about 150.
He wrote a learned and powerful work against Christianity,
which Origen afterwards answered in his famous treatise CotUra
CeUum* In that Treatise, Origen has quoted lai^y finom
Celsus ; and among other quotations, he has given us several
passages which shew with entire certainty that our canonical
Matthew was b the hands of Celsus, and was read by him as

1838.] Qenuinenesi of Matthew L 11. 825

the Christian account of the life and actions of Jesus. Nothing
can be more certain than that the copy which Celsus read,
contained Matthew I. II. ; for the quotations from him by
Origen make this plain. Let me present a few of them to the
reader, for bis entire satisfaction in this matter.

Orig. cont. Cels. II. 32, " Nimis insolenter ait [Celsus]
tov^ ytviuXoyriaavta^ t6» ^Jfjoovv ano rov Ttgdtov qvvtog [sc.
Adamo, Luke III], nai rwv i¥ '/ovdaiotg paaeXt'top.^^ [Matt. I.]

lb. I. 66, Celsus is represented as thus addressing Jesus :
t/ Of vrimo¥ fr$ IxQfiv tig ^tyvnrov ixxoftiCfO'Bai ; . . . SyyiXog
fiiv ilX£¥ ii ovgapovy mXivotif aot xai Tolg oixetoig -dvyHV comp.
Matt. 2: 13. Again : " Deus dvo ijdfj did at iyyiXovg miserat ;"
comp. Matt. 1: 30. 2; 12.

In v. 58 ib. Origen testifies that Celsus had mentioned
70 ntgltijg Maglag xvovarig iXtjXvOfpamQog top 'Matjip S/yiXop
[Matt. 1: 20J, nul naltPf iintg rov to fiptipog yipptj&ip xai
tit$PovXiv6fiBPOv tluQTiiaavtag q. vyitp ttg jiiyvnxov [Matt. 2: 13].

In I. 34 of the same work, Origen says that Celsus had
mentioned many things in the Gospel of Matthew ; e. g.
top apaiflXupta oor/pa inl r^ytpioi^ tov 'Jijaov, [Matt. 2: 2]*

In 1. 58 Origen says of Celsus : XaXdaiovg, qftjah^ imo vov
XiXix&ai x$pfi^fptag inl t^ yfvfoe^ avtov iXtiXv^hfM, ngoauv^
v^oapttg avtoPf iti vi^niov, tog ^eop [Matt 2: 11], xai *Hgto9ij x^
tiiQOLQXV '^ovTO dtdrjXwxipa^ [Matt. 2: 3], ropdt mfAi^apxa dnoX"
ztipal tovg ipTtf avt(f xqop^ yiyipptifkipovg [Matt. 2: 16.]

More might be added ; but these references to Matthew I.
II. are so plain and indisputable that not a shadow of doubt can
remain, that Celsus, about the middle of the second century,
repeatedly quoted the first two chapters of Matthew as con-
fessedly and avowedly a part of Gospel History.

Nor is there a quotation taken from the Gospel in ques-
tion, among all the ancient fathers, from the apostolic ones
downwards, the authority of which is plainly and simply avowed
or implied, which does not come from our canonical Matthew.
The use of any other Gospel in the church catholic is out of
question. At all events, the earliest information we have,
gives us no reason to believe that any other was ever used by
the church at large.

The same evidence^ moreover, which we have of the ex-
istence of a Greek Matthew, and of its being used by the early
churches, we also have of the first two chapters of the same, as
constituting a component part of the Greek Matthew.

S26 Oemdneness of Matthew L IL [Oct.

Our positive external evideoce, then, is as complete of the
early existence and authenticity of this part of Matthew, as it is
of the rest of his Gospel, or of any other Grospel which is con-
tained in our Canon.

One circumstance more, however, should be here added ;
not because our proof actually needs any aid from it, but hi or-
der to shew how much testimony may easily be combined to
establish the point which I am labouring to establish.

The Peshito or old Syriac Version of the New Testament,
has already been mentioned, in my dissertation on the original
language of Matthew's Gospel, published in the preceding num-
ber of this Miscellany. We have seen that this Version was
in all probability made within the first half of the second cen-
tury ; and therefore that it was made about the time when Jus-
tin Martyr and Celsus wrote the works from which I have made
so many quotations in the preceding pages. We have also seen,
that Matthew I. IL is not only translated into the Syriac, but
that the translator must have had the same text, verbatim and
literatim^ which now stands in our canonical Greek Matthew.
Every xa/, di^ ovv, or other particle, is scrupulously rendered ;
and the passage which gives offence to such critics as Kuinoel —
^^ which being interpreted is Ood vrith m" — stands in the
Peshito, exactly in accordance \Oith our present canonical
Matthew.

Let us look now at the nature of the case before us. Here,
in the very next generation, or nearly so, after the apostolic age,
is a writer (Justin Martyr) in the midst of Ebionites and Naza-
renes, living at Flavia Neapolis in Samaria, and appealing to
and citing our canonical Greek Matthew ; and not only this, but
particularly Matthew I. II. About the same period a heathen
philosopher, probably an Epicuraean, a strenuous and con-
temptuous enemy of Christianity, in his attack upon this refi-
gion appeals to our canonical Matthew, and oftentimes to
chap. I. II. Not improbably this infidel writer composed

work in Egypt. Then, in the next place, we have a transla-
tion of the New Testament Scriptures, made about the same
time in Syria, probably in the remoter part of it, at Edessa, of
which it is certain that our canonical Greek Matthew was the
basis, and beyond all doubt that chapters L II. were translated
fix)m the identical text which we now have.

Nor is even this all the early external evidence which may
be produced. Cerinthus was a Jewish heretic, of the Gnostic

1838.] Gemdmnesi of Matthew 1. 11. 327

cast, ID the first century, and be lived but a few years after the
Gospel of Matthew was composed (fl. 80). That he was a
Palestine Jew, Paulus has rendered altogether probable, in his
HUioria CertntAt, contained in his Introduct. in Nov. Testa-
ment. Capita selectiora, and Schmidt in his Bibl. fiir Kritik und
Exe^ese des N. Test. B. I. S. 181, Cerinth ein Judaidrender
Chrut. That he and Carpocrates made use of the Oospel aC"
cording to the Hebrews^ is expressly asserted by Epiphanius
(Haeres. XXX. 13), who says: '^Cerinthus and Carpocrates,
using the same Gospel with them [the Ebionites], endeavours
to shew from the genealogy at the beginning of the Gospel
xata Jfat^aioif, that Christ sprung from the seed of Joseph and
Mary. But they [the Ebionites] cutting off the genealogy in
Matthew, begin their Gospel as I said before, viz., Eyivfio h
tatg i^fiigaig 'llgoidov BaatXtmg %t]g '/ovdaiag, etc." By the
same Gospel Epiphanius evidently means here the Gospel in
Hebrew* This Gospel the Ebionites received, but they cur-
tailed it by omitting the first two chapters ; while Cerinthus and
Carpocrates laboured to prove, from these very chapters,
in their Hebrew copies, the merely natural and human origin of
the Saviour.

So then we go back here to the very age of the apostles, and
find Jews at that period using a Hebrew Gospel, which con-
tains the chapters whose genuineness is now called in question.

Evidence simultaneous, from so many different quarters
and in such a variety of ways, cannot be resisted. It is cer-
tain that in the next generation after the apostles, our canonical
Matthew was the only authenic one to which the church catho-
lic made appeal ; and equally certain, that chapters I. II. con-
stituted the same portion of it which they now do.

Such is the state of external evidence, that Matthew I. II. is
genuine and contemporaneous with the whole book. In justice
to the subject, however, it should not be dbmissed, until we in-
quire whether there is any internal evidence which will serve to
corroborate the testimony already exhibited. My answer to
this inquiry is, that there are some phenomena in chap. III.,
which seem to be unaccountable in case the Gospel of Matthew
originally began with the third chapter.

First the di in Matt. 3: 1 is deserving of special note. A
perfectly clear case it is, that a book could not commence with
a di in the first clause, inasmuch as di is such a connective parti-
cle as necessarily implies something antecedent in the discourse.

328 Oenuinenest of Matthew L II. [Oct.

But if chapters I. II. did not ori^nally belong to this Gospdi
then there was in this case no antecedent.

I am aware that not a few Mss., and some of good authority,
omit the da here ; and so, also, several of the Versions. But,
as Griesbach remarks (Comm. Criu p. 23), ' do good reasoo
can be given why dt should be added j [to the text). On the
other hand, as this verse was the beginning of a x^^rccAaioy, orof
an apayvoaOfAa (^kction)^ there is a very plain reason for its
omission [in Lectionaries], specially as the matter which follows
is very discrepant from that which precedes.' Hence Griesbach,
concludes, respecting the particle in question, that "rectios
retinetur." But if retained, it argues the necessity of prece*
dent matter ; i. e. the Gospel could not have begun here ; and
so the existence of chapters I. II.^ or at any rate of some matter
of this kind, is of necessity implied.

1 am aware that the usual answer to all th'is has been and
still is, that the translator into Greek added the ^/, in order to
keep up the connection between the two narratives, vis. that
which precedes and that which follows. But why he needed
to do this, cannot be well shewn. So great a transition woqU
appear even to more advantage, so far as grammar or rhetoric
is concerned, without the <f£'than with it. And after all, it is t
mere assumption, when one says that it was added by a trans-
lator. The Old Syriac translator, at any rate, found the ^'ia
the copy from which be made his version.

But dismissing this, let us see if there he not something rooie
in the text here, which is deserving of particular notice.

What can be meant by iv tatg fifttpa&g Imlpuigl " Hbse
days" must necessarily refer to some days which had been al-
ready mentioned or alluded to. But if the first two cbapteis
are not genuine, there is of course no such mention or allusioo.

The Ebionite Gospel, which rejected these two chapters, in-
stead of indpaig, adds 'HQiidov tov PaoiUmg xrig 'lovSai^'
But what an emendation ! In the days of Herod, who had
been dead some twenty-eight years !

Nor is the appeal to Ex. 2: 11 for an analogical case, at all in
point. Ex. 2: 1 1 runs thus : " It came to pass, tit those day,
when Moses was grown." The preceding verse (v. 10) says:
" The child [Moses] grew ; and she [his mother] brought him
unto Pharaoh's daughter, and he became her son, etc." Nov
those days, in v. 11, may refer either to the period mentiooed
here, or to what is expressed in the phrase immediately sob*

1838.] OeTwinenesB of Matthew L 11. 899

joined id v. 11. viz. when Motes was grown^ which seems to
be added for the sake of explaining what those days mean.

Nor can those days in Matt. 3: 1, be satisfactorily explained,
by merely calling the phrase a Hebraism. True it is, that the
Hebrews were accustomed thus to designate time. But in all
cases, where larvn , those, is employed with D^»^ , the context
shews the nature and object of reference.

There is another expression in chapter III. which would
seem to be very strange, in case chapters I. II. were not origin-
ally integral parts of Matthew's Gospel. I refer to v. 13, where
it is said : *' Then coroeth Jesus yrom QalileeJ^ Now if chap*
1. 11. are removed, there is no mention whatever of Jesus, nor
of the place of his abode, previous to this declaration. Would
it not be passing strange for a writer thus to introduce a most
important personage wholly unknown to the reader, and thus
to mention his place of abode, just as if it were already familiar
to the reader ? How can we account for a manner so abrupt,
and such declarations without the least preparation for them ?

On the other hand ; supposing the first two chapters of Mat-
thew to be genuine, we can easily explain all these expressions*
M connects chap. III. with the preceding history. *£v lifiigaig
instvuiQ refers to what is said at the close of chap. II., viz.,
that Jesus came, with Joseph and Mary, and dwelt at Naza-
reth, and that during his abode there John the Baptist entered
upon his public ministry. That Jesus " came fix>m Galilee,"
3: 13, is explained by 3: 22, where it is said that Joseph and
Mary * went to sojourn in the re^on of Galilee.'

That there is a large interval of time between the occurren-
ces narrated in chap. II. and those in chap. III., is true enough.
But as the writer bad no intention of developing the private
life of Jesus, the nature of the case required, that he should
make a transition to the period of his public ministry. Transi-
tions as great as these, are not unfrequent ; specially in the pro-
phetic parts of the Old Testament.

LfCt the reader now put all these facts together, and then
ask himself, whether there is any probability that the two first
chapters of Matthew are spurious ? The external and internal
evidence is certainly very strong in favour of the position, that
they came from the hand of Matthew, the author of the whole
hook.

Vol. XII. No. 32. 42

330 GentUneneis of Matthew I. II. [Oct.

^ 9* Examination of Objectiom.

(1) < The Gospel ofthe Ebionites did not contain Matt. I. IL'

oo Epiphanius declares ; and very probably be has told us
the truth. But then we have the same authority to prove, that
the Hebrew Gospel ofthe Nazarenes, and also that of Cerinthos,
did contain these chapters. Jerome who translated the Nasa-
rene Gospel, never intimates any deficiency here ; which he
surely would have done, had it been found in his copy.

Besides, we have a solution of this difficulty in the fact, that
the Ebionites rejected the miraculous conception of Jesus.
This led them to do the same thing, which the Manichaeaus
afterwards did for another reason drawn from their theology or
philosophy, viz., to reject that portion of Matthew which disa-
greed with their speculations. So Marcion did, in respect to
the Gospel of Luke ; so some of the Romish church aftivwards
did with respect to the epistle to the Hebrews, in their disputes
against the Montanists, who appealed to that epistle in oraer to
shew that lapsed Christians could not be restored agiun to re-
pentance ; and so the Anti-millenarians did, at a later period,
when they rejected the Apocalypse. So even Luther did, ia
respect to the epbde of James, when he disputed with the Ro-
manists about the doctrine of justification by faith alone. There
is no end of such subterfuges among men of ardent tempera-
ment, or of bigoted feelings in respect to particular sectarian
points of doctrine. How could Mr. Norton say, (p. liv), that
'* he can perceive nothing in the prejudices or habits of mind [of
the Ebionites] which led them to reject the lacts [related in
Matt. LU.?j

All this, however, proves nothing except the strength of
prejudice in a particular party among early Chrisdans. Even
the Hebrew Gospel of primitive times was mutilated, as we
have seen, only by one small party ; and the authority of this
party can weigh but little indeed, in a matter like the present,
where so much direct and positive testimony lies before us
which is against them.

At all events, as Griesbach well remarks, (Comm. Criu O.
p. 52), ^ nothing can be proved by the hints we have respectiDg
the state of the Ebionite Gospel, until it shall be shown more
clearly what relation tliis Gospel sustained toward our canoni-
cal Matthew, so that we can reason from the state of the for-
mer to that of the latter.'

1838.] Oemdneness of Matthew I. II. 331

The manner in which the Gospel of the Ebionites commences,
shews what sort of a compilation it was : ^^ It came to pass in
the days of Herod, the King of Judea, that John came, bap-
tizing with the baptism of repentance in the river Jordan, etc."
So it is quoted in Epiphan. Haeres. XXX. 13 ; but in Haeres.
XXX. 14, he gives us another beginning of this same Gospel :
^*It came to pass in the days of Herod, King of Judea, while
Caiphas was high priest, there came a certain John, by name,
baptizing with the baptism of repentance, etc." Here Luke 3:
S, respecting the high-priesthood of Caiphas, is intermingled
with the text. In both, the wretched mistake is made of
Herod being King of Judea, when John entered on his public
ministry. Hemd, the King of Judea, died the year after the
birth of the Sanour, i. e. some twenty-eight years before John's
public appearance, and after him there was indeed a Herod
who was a tetrarch, but no Herod who was a king, as here
quoted.

Shall we resort, now, to such a Gospel as this, for establish-
ing the interpolation of Matt. I. II. ? 1 trust not.

(2) ' The Protevangelium from which three of the Evan-

B lists composed their narrations, did not probably contain
att. I. n.'

Supposing now I should aver, that it did probably contain
these chapters ; my assertion would be just as good as the
opposite one. Of the Protevangelium no ancient writer of the
church ever spoke, heard, or dreamed. It is a phenomenon of
Neology alone, first dreamed, I believe, among countless other
like visions, by the great heresiarch Semler ; and after him by
others, whose imaginations were as lively as his; finally, how-
ever, dreamed even on English ground, and by a man who is
now a bishop ; but, last of all, scattered, as dreams are at the
opening dav, by an American at Cambridge, who has, one
would think, so completely dissipated it that it will not soon
make its appearance again.

(3) ' Mark begins his Gospel without any preface which
relates the history of Jesus' infancy ; and so Matthew probably
began his, for Mark, who is the miomator of Matthew, has not
given us a word of the Gospel of the Infancy.'

Nor has he given us any of the Sermon on the Mount ; nor
of many other things contained in Matthew. Are these there-
fore to be rejected as spurious ?

Besides ; there is no satisfactory evidence that Mark copied

833 Geimineneis of MaUhew L IL [Oct.

Matthew at all. Mr. Norton has completely overthrown thb
position, in his work. And if be bad not, the improbability of
the thing is so great, when all the circumstances are taken ioio
view, that almost no one now pretends to believe in such ao
allegation.

Moreover, John gives us nothing of the Gospel of the Infu-
cy. Is Matthew, therefore, to be judged of by a compuisoo
with him ?

(4) ' Luke has given us a Gospel of the Infancy, which is
not only different in all respects from that of Matthew, but b
some respects is scarcely to be reconciled with it.'

But the fact that Luke has composed a Gospel of the In&a-
cy, shows that such a thing might be done, and that it wis
done ; and why could not Matthew as well Compose one as
Luke ? As to the fact that his history differs from that of Mat-
thew, is this any good reason lor rejecting that of the latter?
Does Luke give the same account of the Sermon on the Mouot,
as Matthew ? Does he minutely accord with bim in the rela-
tion of a great many transactions, and particularly those re-
specting the trial, condemnation, crucifixion, and resurrection of
the Saviour ? Every one knows the answer to tliese questioos,
who has made the comparison..

Another thing also is equally clear to a candid reader of both
histories ; viz. that tliere is nothing in Matthew which gaiosajs
in the least what is set forth by Luke. On the contrary, the
substantial fact, viz. the miraculous conception of the Saviour,
is fully portrayed by both Evangelists.

(5) * But there are internal difficulties, improbabilities, aod
at least seeming contradictions with other Evangelists, contained
in Matt. L U.'

On these Mr. Norton, and some others of bis opinion, seem
mainly to rely ; for most of the objections already examined do
not belong to Mr. Norton, but to otho* earlier writers. I^
us now consider, then, the arguments which Mr. Norton spe-
cifically alleges in favour of his own views.

Mr. Norton concedes (p. liv.) that the two Gcst chapters of
Luke " always made a part of his Gospel." He thinks, iodeed,
that they were translated by Luke, or some other person, from
a Hebrew writing ; and he says that " the cast of the narrative
has something of a poetical, and even fabulous character about
it.'' But still, with these difficulties, Mr. Norton agrees to re-
ceive the narration as containing what is historicaUy true in re-
spect to its main facts.

1838.] Geuuineneit ofMaUhew I. U. 333

He thinks, moreover, that Luke received the account given
in these cbapterst because it conformed to the belief of the
apostles, ' Any thing contradictory to this, therefore, cannot
be received as true.'

The first great stumbling-block thrown in his way by Mat-
thew I. II. is, that the genealogy there differs so entirely from
that of Luke. All the attempts to explain this be pronounces
to be merely ^* conjectural ;" i. e. as I suppose, to rest merely
upon what is but conjecture. None of them, he says, are satis-
factory.

One mode of conciliation has been the supposition, that Luke
gives the genealogy of Joseph as sonrinrlaw^ and not improba-
bly as also an adopted son of Heli. But says Mr. Norton, *' if
Luke had intended to give the genealogy of Jtfory, he would
say so. He would not have indicated his meaning so ambigu-
ously and circuitously as by affirming that Joseph was the son
of Heli, when he meant only that be was his son-in-law, Heli
being Mary's father." (p. Iv.)

Yet, to a man who has made himself familiar with the man-
ner and principles of Hebrew genealogy, nothing could be less
probable than such a declaration. Luke give the Hebrew go
Bealogy of k female ! And give it directly, making her one of
the prominent links, the very end of the cham ! Where in all
the Old Testament or the iVew is any such thing ? In Mat-
thew's genealogy, and in others contained in the Old Testa-
ment, a female is now and then mentioned ; but it is merely as
an aitacheiy and not as one of the principal links in the chain.
Luke, be it remembered, was giving a Hebrew genealogy, and
not a Greek one. Had a female appeared in this directly as
one of the main links, the Jews of course would have said :
This b no Hebrew genealogy.

But has not Luke in fact said something, which may natural-
ly enough lead us to suppose that he is giving the genealogy of
Joseph as merely putative father or foster-father of Jesus ?
Considered in this light, Jesus may naturally be regarded as
the ptUative son, or son by reckoning, of Heli, the son of Mat-
that, etc. What says he of Jesus ? He says : cSy, <i#V ipoiii-
Csro, vlog 'loHniq>^ xov 'HXlj %, t. k. Now it is a fair and exact
translation of this, when we render it : '^ Being ihepuiative son
of Joseph, [the son] of Heli, etc." The writer means clearly
to say, that Jesus was not in reality, but only putatiteb/, the
son of Joseph, the son of Heli. Joseph then is reckoned here

334 Gemdneneu of Matthew L U. [Oct.

simply as putative father. And such being naost plainly the
case, how comes he to sustain such a relation ? Because, the
natural reply is, be was the husband of Mary, the actual mother
of Jesus. May it not be, then, that as a putative father of Je-
sus, i. e. as the husband of Maiy, he is here affirmed to sustain
the relation of son to Heli ? May not the tofnrinrlaw of Heli,
moreover, and perhaps bis adopted son also, be called jor, ac-
cording to the Hebrew usage ? At all events, there is some-
thing here in the language of Luke which claims particolar no-
tice, and deserves more investigation than Mr. Norton or the
commentators in general have given it. Does not Naomi call
Ruth and Orpah her daughten^ when they were merely the
wives of her two sons ? See Ruth 1:11.

Let it be noted, that all the Evangelists of the New Testa-
ment regard it as a plain matter offacty that Christ is the son
of David. Paul says, in so many words : rav vlov avrov toi
yiifOfuvov tit omgfiatos Aavti xata aopsca, Rom. 1: 3. Christ
then, in his human nature, was a real^ not a merely putative,
son of David. But if neither the genealogy of Matthew nor
Luke proves this point, where is the proof to be found?
It might indeed be true, that neither of these evangelists has
given us the genealogy of Mary, and still she may have been of
the race of David. But would it not seem very strange, when
the Jews made so much of this point (see Luike 20: 41), and
when it was a most evident expectation of the whole nation,
even of the lowest class of people, that the Messiah would be
an actual son of David, that no one of the Evangelists should
have given us a hint on this subject, which would shew that he
was any thing more than a mere putative son of David, and
this because his foster-father was descended from that king ?

I have another suggestion to make ; which is, that on the
ground that Luke has given Joseph's genealogy as a real and
not as a putative son of Heli, then either the Gospel of Luke
or of Matthew (our canonical Matthew) must . have lost all
credit soon after their publication. Every circumstance con-
spires to make the impression on us, that the genealogy of Mat-
thew belongs to Joseph, and is intended to present him as a
real descendent of those named as his ancestors. We have
seen, moreover, that Cerinthus, near the close of the very age
of the apostles, used this genealogy for his own peculiar purpo-
ses, in regard to establishing the human origin of the Saviour.
We know that Cerinthus, Justin Martyr, Celsus, and the Syri-

1838.] Oenuinenesi of Matthew L 11. 335

ac translator, all found Matthew^s genealogy in their copies of
his Gospel. Now if the genealogy of Luke was regarded, at
that period, as contradicting that of Matthew ; and it was also
known that a genuine Hebrew Matthew was in existence which
omitted the genealogy, and this saved all appearances of con-
tradiction ; how is it possible to account for it, that the early
churches did not at once embrace the opportunity thus offered of
being freed from the difficulty ? Either they did not actuaUy
find any serious difficulty, at a very early period; or else they
were unaccountably remiss and negligent in attention to this
perplexing subject. If they found no difficulty, it must be be-
cause they regarded Luke as not contradicting Matthew ;
which could happen, only b case they supposed Luke to give
the genealogy of Joseph as son-inrlaw of Heli. Any other
mode of conciliation seems to be so nugatory, that it is hardly
worth a discussion. If they found difficulty, why did they not
resort at once to the obvious method of freeing themselves from
it, by receiving at once the Hebrew Matthew of the Ebionites
as genuine, and thus omitting the two first chapters, or at least
the genealogy 7

But this is not all. There is another point of view which
seems to make the matter in question plainer still. Matthew
(in case be inserted the genealogy), and Luke also, must have
taken their genealogies from the public tables, or at any rate
from the family records. They could not have framed a
genealogy 6f their own, i. e. one which was in any measure
factitious. Had either of them done this, as soon as his Gospel
was published the unbelieving Jews would have gone at once to
the family records, and falsified the Gospel. Were there not
Jews malignant and cunning enough to do this ? And were
there not members even of the Saviour's family, i. e. near rela-
tives according to the flesh, who did not believe on him ?
John 7: 5. Did the vigilance of unbelieving Jews sleep when
the Gospels were first published — ^that vigilance which had
persecuted to banishment and blood the early Christians? This
will not be said. What was here to be done, then, when a
factitious genealogy was published by a Christian writer of
seeming authority ? Nothing more need to be done in order
utterly to overthrow the credit of his so-called Gospel, than to
investigate the family records of Joseph and Mary, and bring
before the public the true state of the case. Was this done ?
We have no account of it. Not a whisper even in Justin

336 Oenuineness of Matthew L IL [Oct.

Martjr, to tell us that the Jews had discredited, or oould db-
credit, the genealogies ; and yet he gives all the Jewish ob-
jections to the Gospels, current in his day.

But let us put the subject in still another attitude. Matthew
or Luke, (the objector may select which be pleases), publishes
a genealogy which he knew to be factitious. Did not both of
these writers know, that every opposing aud malignant Jew had
it in his power at once to discredit the whole of his narratioo ?
They must have possessed less understanding than we give
them credit for, not to have known this ; yea, they must even
have been deficient in common sense.

But it will be said here, * the supposition now is, that Mat-
thew did not himself publish a genealogy.' Be it so then, fiir
the sake of discussion ; still the case is very little if any the more
favourable for those who maintain this. Cerinthus had a
genealogy ; Justin had one ; Celsus had one ; the Greek trans-
lator of Matthew (if there was one^ found one in his Hebrew
copy of Matthew, as Mr. Norton nimself concedes. Now as
this translation (if it were ever made) must have been made in
the first century, how came the difficulties about the genealogy
then to be overlooked ? Tliere was no point of time during that
period, when there were not keen sighted and malignant Jews,
who would have exposed the inconsistencies and errors of such
a Gospel of Matthew, had that beenliableto confiitatkxi. The
family of Jesus, i. e. at least some branches of his kinsmen after
the flesh, must have been still surviving, and genealogy was
a thing that could always be easily verified.

What remains then for us to believe, except that the eaiiiest
Christians did not see, or did not find, the difilculties in the
genealogies which Mr. Norton finds. If they did not, it must
have been because they viewed one of them as being a gene-
alogy of Joseph as son-iri'law. On any other ground the case
is too plain to admit of any serious doubt.

Julius Africanus (fl. 210) as quoted bv Eusebius (H. Eoc I.
7) shews a somewhat difierent state of feeling on the subject of
the genealogies, from what we must suppose had exited in
the very early ages of Christianity. He strenuously en-
deavoured to reconcile the apparent discrepancies between
them ; and he testifies that others before him had in vaiioos
ways attempted the same thing. Consequently these must
have been writers within the second century. Whatever mi^t
have been the cause of it, it would seem that ainxwd, i. e. at a

ia38.] Oenvinentu o/Maiikew L U. 331

distance from Palestine and among the Greeks and RomaaSi
the subject of genealogies was not regarded in the same light as
in and near Palestine. Hence it is easy to suppose, that
difficulties would spring up; and they did in fact exist. But
when they had sprung up, why did it never enter into the
mind of any of the ancient fathers, that they might all be easily
disposed of, by merely adopting that copy of the original He*
brew Gospel of Matthew, which was in circulation among the
Ebtonites ? Yet thb obvious remedy was not adopted nor even
proposed. On the contrary, Julius Africanus, as copiously
quoted by Eusebius and with marked approbation, endeavours
to conciliate the whole difficulty by the following ingenious
conjecture, viz* ; Matthan (the proper grandfather of Joseph)
was a descendant from David in the line of Solomon ; Melchi
putative grandfather of Joseph sprung from David in the line
of Nathan ; Nathan married and begat Jacob (the proper father
of Joseph), and then died; Melchi marridd his widow and
begat Heli, so that Jacob and Heli were uterine brothers, the
one being the real father of Joseph, and the other the putative
father, i. e. father»in4aw^ inasmuch as he was the husband of
Joseph's mother. Thus Africanus thinks^ and Eusebius with
him, that all the serious difficulties may be removed. But not
with good reason, as the subject appears to my mind. For
still theve is no proof at all on this ground, that Christ is any
thing more than a merely puiativt son of David. Julius
Africanus, and after him Eusebius, does indeed suppose that
Joseph married, according to the Jewish law, within his own
tribe, i* e. the tribe of Judah ; but surely the £imily of David
did not oonstitute this whole tribe ? This supposition, there^
fore, leaves open a wide chasm in the series of proof which
seems necessary, in order to satisfy the mind that Jesus was the
actual son of I>avid« Besides, it is utterly improbable that the
genealogy of Joseph should have, at one and the same time,
been reckoned two different ways, either in the publb or
family tables. The only tenable position seems to be, then,
that Luke reckons the pedigree of Joseph as xon-tn^/aur. The
language of Luko b certainly peculiar, where he speaks of
Joseph and Jesus. So long ago as the time of Julius Africanus
this was remarked ; for he says, as quoted by Euseb. in I. 7:
ti^w fag nata voftov fAaa^v iniOfinotiQ^p ovx ^¥ iiiuttiP' x«!
TO iyippfiatp ini v^ff touiadi naiionotag oj|f(u uTiovg ialmn$
L e. < he could not have more plainly designated a legal [u e.
Vol. Xn. No. 32. 43

338 Genuineness of Maitheyf L U. [Oct.

putative) mode of reckoning ^nerations [than he has dooe, in
Matt. I.J ; he has even omitted the word iyivwi^i through the
genealogy down to the very end.*

Without resting the force of the argument, however, od the
somewhat peculiar diction of Luke, it is enough to say, thattwo
genealogies so discrepant as that of his and of Matthew, coold
not have existed in the primitive age, in two Gospels, withoat
sacrificing the credit of one of these Gospels ; I mean that such
must have been the effect, in case they were both designed to
be, and were counted as, the regular genealogies of Joseph.
Two actual genealogies of him, and two that differed so mudi
in regard to him in the same relation, he could not have. It is
an absurdity on the face of it. One of the two, therefore, most
have been of him as son-in-law, and not improbably as adopted
Son. Then ail is easy, natural, reconcilable, explicable. It
was foreigners, who did not know how to estimate the Jewish
genealogies, that first began to doubt and to find difficulty, and
thus it is at the present day. Yet the very nature of the case
shews, that such difficulties were not felt to exist, when ibe
Gospels were first published.

To suppose, as Mr. Norton does, (p. Ivi.), that *some He-
brew convert, who composed the narration in Matt. I. II.,
shortly after the destruction of Jerusalem, found a genealogy of
some Joseph, which he mistook for the Joseph in question, and
adopted it as a part of his narration; and then that the
double mistake should be backed up by a third, viz., the r^
ception of all this as a <!;enuine Gospel of Matthew — such a
reception also while the Ebionites had in circulation a geooioe
Matthew from which these chapters are excluded — to suppose
all this, is more conjecture than we can indulge. It strangles
us if we attempt to swallow it. Besides ; Mr. Norton has
argued from p. 5J7 of his book and onward at great length, to
shew the improbability, or rather the impossibility, that all the
copies of the Gospels should in any way whatever have heeo
corrupted to any extent of serious importance. He has arrayed
a host of arguments against this ; and a strong and well anned
host it is, and, as it seems to me, quite invincible. But there b
not a single argument there employed by him, in defeoce of
the Gospels at large, which may not be employed against him
here with the same power. An addition of so much, so io^
portant, so difficult matter as is contained in Matt. I. II* by aoy
writer that lived only some ten or twenty years after iw*

1838.] Oenuintnes$ of Matthew L IL t39

apostle published his Gospel, and this while he himself, per-^^
haps, or at any rate some of his personal acquaintance and
friends were living, who knew what he did write and what he
did not — ^such an addition, at such a time and under such cir-
cumstances, is in itself utterly incredible. The Ebionites did
indeed exclude the chapters in question, and they had party
reasons for so doing ; but neither the Nazarenes, nor any part
of the church catholic, ever thought of freeing themselves Iroin
the difficulties of these chapters in this way.

Other objections, if the dificuliies presented by any part of
the Scriptures is to be a good ground of objection to its genuine-
ness, might have been suggested by Mr. Norton, in the present
case. These are, that wliiie Matthew reckons only twenty-
eight links between David and Christ, Luke makes forty-two.
Then again, Matthew has reckoned by three series of fourteen ;
which, as the text now stands, it seems difficult to make out ;
he has also omitted three links between Joram and Uzziah in
chap. 1: 8, viz. Ahaziah, Joash, and Amaziab, see 2 Chron.
XXII — XXV. He has evidently omitted more still between
Naasson and David ; for, during this period of more than 400
years he counts only four generations. In all probability he
has also omitted some links in the last series of fourteen. Nor
is his genealogy the only one which presents difficulties. Luke,
in 3: 36, inserts a Kalwavy which belongs not to the Hebrew
genealogies of the Old Testament. Now all these difficulties,
except the last, might have been removed in early ages by
adopting the exemplar of the Ebionites. Yet the early chureb^
although it felt and recognized the difficulties, never once
thought, as it appears, of removing them in this way. It is too
late for us to do it now, by such a summary process. There
are, I apprehend, other and satisfactory ways of removing the
difficulties just stated ; but my present object does not permit
me to go into a discussion of these subjects. I roust aismiss
them, therefore, in order to investigate what Mr. Norton has
said in respect to difficulties suggested by him.

Luke presents us with an account of Joseph and Mary, first
as residing at Nazareth ; then, on oooasion of the census under
Augustus, as going to Bethlehem, where Jesus was bora ; then,
after the forty days' legal purification o( Mary, as presenting
Jesus at the temple, and afterward returning again to Nazareth.
With this Mr. Norton thinks the account in Matthew L IL sub-
stantially to disagree. < Matthew,^ he says, < without mention-

340 (?eiitttft«fieff ofMuiihew L BL [Oct.

iog aoy previous residence at Nasaretb, relates thai Jesus was
born at BuKUhtm ; that the Magi pud their visit to him there ;
that the jealousy of Herod was so excited by the story of hb
birth as to order the massacre of the children at Bethleben ;
that Joseph and Mary, being divinely admonished, escaped and
fled to Egypt with the child Jesus ; that he waited there uatii
the death oi Herod, when he set out to return, intending to go
to Bethlehem as his proper place of residence, (as it would ap-
pear from the narration of the writer, who seems to have sup-
posed Bethlehem to be his AomeV and was turned aside to Naz-
areth only in consequence of divine admonition.'

These narratives, as thus represented, Mr. Norton says, "can-
not be referred to the same authentic source, being apparently
so contradictory, and scarcely a single circumstance io tfaem
coinciding ;" their ' general complexion also presents ao aspect
very different.' The account ot Luke being received by the
apostles, Mr. Norton ^ cannot believe,' he says ^ that another so
imlike it proceeded from Matthew.' (pp. Ivii. seq.)

After all, however, I am not persuaded that Mr. Norton's
oomclusions in this case are well grounded. Let us attend lo
several circumstances which may help us in our judgment res-
pecting this matter.

First, is it true that the accounts of Luke and Matthew co-
incide '^ in scarcely a single circumstance ?"

Both agree that Jesus was bom of a vii^in ; that his coooep*
tion was miraculous ; that he was the son of David ; that he
was bora at Betlilehem ; and that angels were employed in an-
nouncing the manner of his birth, and the object of his mission.
Here then are all the essentiai facts in respect to bis descent,
character, and station. Otiier circumsianoes added by one
Evangelist, are omitted by another.

If now we go upon the ground seemingly defended by Mr.
Norton, that when one Evangelist inserts what another Ins
omitted, then one of them must be considered as canirttdkivf
the other ; it would follow that there is scarcely a narration of
any important matter \n all the Gospels, in which contradictioo
may not be found. Nothing can be tnore fatal to the whole
Corfue £oaii^e/tciim than such a principle. Nothing can be
more unfounded, I may well add, than such an diijection*
What two histories, ancient or modem, which are not merely
copied from each other, could stand on the ground of a luio ol
criticism like that here adopted by Mr. Norton ?

1836.] Gemmeau$$ of Matthew L IL 841

But amid all these varyiog cifcurastances narrated by Mat-
thew and Luke, is there one in Matthew which contradicts
any one in Luke ? Not a single one. All may be true which
Luke declares, and yet all may be equally true which Matthew
has told us. It answers no purpose here to suggest, as Mr.
Norton does, that Luke applied to the mother and family of Je-
sus for the particulars respecting his infancy, and that there
could have been but one story among them respecting these
matters. Might not the same be said of all the other discrepant
(discrepant but not contradictory) narrations which the Gospels
every where contain ? Did not the eye and ear witnesses,
from whom these accounts were derived, tell for substance one
story ? Yet the particulars inserted or omitted by different
Evangelists vary exceedingly from each other, some inserting
what others omit, and some narrating at length what others
briefly touch* E. g. compare the history of the temptation by
Mark, and even by Matthew and Luke ; and where is the his*
tory of the transfiguration to be found, except in Matthew ?
Where is the history of the healing at the pool of Bethesda, of
the opening of the eyes of the man born blind, of the raising of
LaKarus firom ihe dead, in any Gospel except that of John ? It
is in vain to think of deciding, on such grounds as Mr. Norton
assumes, what one Evangelist should insert, and what he should
omit. Each followed his own judgment ; why is his credit to
be suspected on this account ?

The usual conciliation of Mattliew with Luke has been, the
supposition that after the presentation of Jesus in the temple,
at the end of forty days, the visit of the Masi took place ; and
after this, ensued the massacre at Bethelem, the flight to Egypt,
and the attempt to return to Bethlehem, which was hindered
by the admonition of the angel, and followed by a return to
Nasareth, so as to escape the power of Archelaus.

Mr. Norton pronounces all this to be '' a very improbable
solution." Wkff — he has not told us. If the Magi came, as
they probably did from the regions of Babylon, or perhaps Per*
sia, the time necessary to prepare for their journey must be sev-
eral-days. The journey itself must have taken up many more.
From sixteen to twenty miles a day is, for the most part, the
usual day's journey of oriental travellers. The route to Pales-
tine was very circuitous, extending up the Euphrates far north,
and tlien southward through the eastern part of Palestine. He
cannot well suppose the Magi to have- been at Jerusalem aiuch

342 Genuineness of Matthew L 11. [Oct.

within the forty days of the purification. We may well belieie
that they came soon after this event. And then followed the
events as related in Matthew, and already recapitulated above.

^ But Luke/ says Mr. Norton, ^ declares that the parents of
Jesus went to Nazareth after the presentation in the temple ; be
says nothing of the Magi, nor of Herod, or the massacre, or the
flight to Egypt.' True it is, I answer, that Luke says, the)
returned to Mazareth. But how soon they returned, or what
happened before their return, he does not tell us ; Matthew
does, nor is his narrative at all inconsistent with that of Luke.

Let us look deliberately at the nature of this case. At
Bethlehem Joseph and Mary had certainly resided, before the
presentation of Jesus in the temple, some six weeks. That,
moreover, was the <Wa noA*ff of Joseph and Mary, for to soch
place, according to the decree of Caesar (Luke 2: 3), each in-
dividual was to repair, in order that the census should be com-
pleted. Here then this couple resided at least for six weeb;
and here, it is very natural to conclude of course, they had
relatives, and perhaps possessions. Now Jerusalem is oolj
some six miles from Bethlehem, and of course we cannot sup-
pose it to be probable, that Joseph and Mary did not retorn
thither, for a time at least, after the presentation in the temple.
It is not by any means certain, that they had any design at that
time of returning to Nazareth. They were at least in their (HM
town at Bethlehem. While they were here, preparing (if any
one pleases) to return to Nazareth, the Magi came, aod the
events which followed took place. Leaving Bethlehem in sock
haste as they did after the warning in respect to tiie iotentioos
of Herod, it is very natural to suppose, that they bad business
to transact there and concerns to settle, if not property to dis-
pose of or regulate, after the death of Herod. Why wonder
then that they should set out to return to Bethlehem, after that
death took place ? What improbability, in any way, of such ao
event? Nay, I may well ask : Is not probability altogedieroo
the side of such a supposition ?

From executing their design they were prevented by diriae
warning. In consequence of this, they went to Nazareth.

Both Evangelists agree, then, that Jesus spent his early child-
hood at Nazareth ; neither tells us exactly bow soon after bis
birth he was carried there. One of them relates circumstances,
however, which shew that some months must have interreoed,
before this took place. Why are we to discredit his account i

1838.] GemUneneis of Maiikew L 11. 343

Why — anj more than we should discredit Luke's account of
the temptation, when compared with that of Mark and of
Matthew ?

Mr. Norton (p. l^ii.) seems to represent Matthew, or rather
the writer of the two first chapters of Matthew, as mistaking
Bethlehem for the home of Joseph and Mary, because he
represents them as wishing to go thither, on their return from
Egypt. But may we not well ask : If Joseph and Mary went
to Bethlehem as their idla niXig, in order to be enrolled, as they
surely did according to the account of Luke ; if they, or either
of them, had once dwelt there, and there was their original and
proper home ; if, as is certain again from Luke, they staid there
for forty days or more after the birth of Jesus ; and if we may
admit the account of their sudden flight by nighty as Matthew
avers ; or e?en if we leave out this last circumstance ; is there
any thing strange, or that wears the appearance of mistake, in
representing them, on their return from Egypt, as desirous to
revisit Bethlehem ? And especially as this was not much out
of their way in returning to Nazareth, in case they designed
ultimately to go thither ? I cannot find the internal evidence of
improbability here, which Mr. Norton seems to find, and on
which he has built much of his conclusion.

Again ; Mr. Norton intimates ^p. lix.), that the Gospel of the
Infancy in Matthew wears a fabulous costume, like the apocry-
phal Gospels of this kind which were current in ancient times,
and some of which have come down to us. '* In the story of
the Magi," says h^ ** we find represented a strange mixture
of astrology and miracles. A divine interposition is pretended^
which was addressed to the false opinions of certain Magi,
respecting the significance of the stars ; and for which no pur-
pose worthy of the Deity can be assigned." He represents the
star as having, according to the account in Matthew, ^ guided
them to Jerusalem. Then, distrusting its guidance, they there
inquired, where the new bom king of the Jews was to be
found.' Such an inquiry, Mr. Norton thinks, would have been
unintelligible to the Jews there, who had not, like themselves,
been divinely admonished of a Saviour's birth. Herod also, be
avers, is made to act a very improbable part in this drama.
How could such a contemner of Judaism believe any thing
respecting their promised Messiah ? Or, even if he did, how
improbable must the story be of an indiscriminate massacre of

344 Oenuinenesf of Matthew L IL [Oct.

the cliildren at Bethlehem, wlien Herod could ba?e etsijr
identified the individual child whose life be sought to take
away !

How easy it is to multiply questions and difficulties of this
kind, respecting any unusual occurrence in past times, everf
one must know who has made the experiment, or who bu
read many of the neological commentaries and essays of the
last 6fty years. Yet we need something more than meidj
conjectural difficulties, in order to throw aside facts which are
soberly narrated. Let us see, however, whether, after ail, the
improbabilities of the narration in Matthew are so great, that
we must feel constrained to reject the account before us becaose
of them.

The Magi were a Persian and Babylonian order of meo,
whose business seems to have been the study of religKHi, and d
astrology as connected with it in relation to the science d
<fivioation. They were in some respects, to the Orieotak,
what the Scribes and Pharisees were to the Jews, m. the
UpofgafifAutitg of their country. In the book of Daniel «e
find them consulted by the Babylonish kings. We find Daniel)
moreover, after bis interpretation of Nebuchadnezsar's dreao,
advanced to the place of president or bead of this order of meo.

There is then in itself no improbability, that men ampog the
Jews of the Ea»t (oVaxoAij) who were like to the y^ofiftnA
in Palestine, were called, after the usual fashion of the easieni
country, Ma^. Daniel had belonged to this so-called order of
men ; other Jews might belong to it without reproach.

Magi there were in the Eiast, then ; and Magi may baie
been, and probably were, among the Jews who lived theie.
Had not the Jews of the East copies of the Jewish Scriptures
in their hands ? Undoubtedly they had. Did they not, at the
time when the Saviour was born, long for and ardendy expect
the coming of the Messiah ? What says Suetonius of tbtf
period ? In liis Vespas. c. IV. he says : Perorebuerat (W«J*
toto oetii^ tt constans opinio^ esse in fatis, ut to tempore Judaea
profecti rerum potirentur. To the same purpose Tacitus, His|*
V. 13 : Pluribus persuasio inerat, antiquis sacerdotum litetv
contineri, eo ipso tempore fore, ot valesceret Oriens, profeco-
que Judaea rerum potirentur. Deep, then, must this pefs*-
sion have rooted itself in the minds of the Jews, and wide tno^
it have been spread, in order to give birth to such language 0
this by heathen historians. Josephus himself, a Pharisee lod

1838.] Genuineness of Matthew I. U. 845

' of the priestly order, uses almost the same expressions : ^/&

^Qfjofiog tifiipifiolog Ofioicog iv rolg Ugol^ ygdfifiaatv, w^, xara

toV naigopiniTvoif, ano t^s x^P^S '^^ txvtcjv Sg^ei r^g oixovfievfjg

I Bell. Jud. VI. 5. 4. i. e. tiiere was a prediction moreover, in

^ their sacred books, which was susceptible of various writings,

that about that time, some one of their own number and

I country should have the dominion of the world.'

I Jewish Magi of the East, then, (percrebuerat toto Oriente),

I cherished the expectation that the King of Israel was to make

r his appearance about that time. To the Jews of the East,

f moreover, as well as of the West, his birth was signified by the

f star of which Matthew speaks. That there was something

supernatural in the admonition to the Magi, I readily admit and

most fully believe. Why is not this as probable as the angelic

song on the plains of Bethlehem, and the song or prophecy of

Zacharias, of Simeon, and of Anna, as related by Luke ? all of

which Mr. Norton on his own grounds is constrained to admit.

Let us now turn our attention to some other circumstances
alleged by Mr. Norton. ' The Star,' he says, ' led them to
Jerusalem ; and there, distnisting its guidance, the Magi made
inquiry where the new-bom Sang of the Jews was. After-
wards it reappeared and guided them to the very house in
Bethlehem, where Jesus and his mother were.'

Yet this is an account of the matter somewhat difierent from
that which I believe to be exhibited in Matt. IL I understand
the Magi as saying, in Matt. 2: 3, ** We have seen his star,
when we were in the East, and we have come to do him
homage." That a meteor of an extraordinary nature did ap-
pear to them in their own country ; that the place of this meteor
was west from where they then were, and of course in the
direction of Judaea ; that an impression was divinely made on
their minds of the significancy of this extraordinary luminous
body, (which the writer, as any Greek would do, calls aotiip)
tlimt in consequence of this, and in connection with the general
and ardent expectations of a Jewish king as mentioned above,
they set out upon their journey to pay an early and joyful
homage to this new king ; is what Matthew relates, and what
no one is able to gainsay by shewing either the impossibility or
the improbability of it. That h trj avuroX^ means, as I have
rendered it, while we were in the East, is plain enough from the
fiict, that if the star had been eastward of them, they would

Vol. XII. No. 32. 44

348 Oemdneneu of Matthew L IL . [Oct.

And is it not plain too, that, because of such a massacre, all
the then present and rising hopes of the Jews, even of the pi-
ous, ^who knew not of the flight of Joseph and Mary), weie
actually extinguished ? On what other ground can we acoooot
for the deep a^nd long silence of all Judea, during nearly tbirtj
years, in relation to the new-born king, whose birth bad beeo
ushered in by so many prodigies, even if Luke's account of the
matter, and no more, is to be admitted ? It has often been mi-
ter of wonder among the pious, and of scof&ng among the impi-
ous, that after all the miraculous annunciations of the SaTiour,
and the prodigies attending his birth, there should for thir^
years be such a profound and mysterious silence in Judea with
respect to him. Where were the Simeons and the Annas —
the shepherds on the plains of Bethlehem and those to whom
the glad tidings had been published by them and others ? Why
was not the glorious Redeemer, in his humble and quiet
occupation at Nazareth, sought out, and brought forward to the
notice of the admiring world ?

My answer would be, that the massacre at Bethlehem extin-
guished all the rising hopes of the pious Jews in that quarts,
and dissipated the fears of the ungodly. Providence so ordered
it, that Jesus should be withdrawn in the dead of night to
Egypt, and none should know of his escape. His return was
to a distant, obscure, and despised town of Galilee, where no
Jew would expect to find him, and therefore none would go to
seek him. There his parents and he waited in quiet and in si-
lence, until the proper time for the commencement of his mb-
istry arrived. Had they noised abroad bis origin and bis pre-
tensions, during his early life, danger would have foIk>wed,
civil and religious commotions been excited, the jealousy of te-
trarchs stirred up, and unnumbered evils have been the natural
and immediate consequence. As things were ordered, all this
was prevented. And that this prevention was the result of
some such occurrence as the massacre at Bethlehem, which
extinguished all present hopes about the new-bom king, seems
to my mind so probable, that I can in no way account for it in
a manner that is satisfactory, how things went on as they actu-
ally did, without a supposition of some such event as Matthew
has related.

I cast myself now on the candour of my readers, and ask
them, whether there is any such incongruities and improbabili-
lies in Matthew's Gospel of the Inianay, as Mr. Norton urges

1838.] Oenmnenus of Matthew L IL 849

upon us ? On the other hand, does not the story of Matthew
seem to be quite essential to the satisfying of our minds, how
the youth and early manhood of Jesus could have been spent
in the silence and quietude in which it evidently was ? The
Bethlehem massacre had quieted the fears of the enemies to the
claims of Jesus ; it appears also to have extinguished the rising
hopes of friends. Subsequent to this, Joseph and Mary, ad-
monished of danger, and aware of the importance of shunning
i*ealousy oa the one part and popular expectation on the other,
ived in an obscure and despised place, from which, as Nathan-
iel intimates (John 1: 46), no good thing was expected to come.
There they peaceably acquired the means of subsistence by
bodily labour; and there Jesus pursued the same occupation as
his foster-father, and was quietly and peacefully sul^ect to his
authority. There he did not develope himself as di^ring from
others apparently his equals in age and condition, until the ful-
ness of time had come, in this way, envy, jealousy, malignity,
and (what was no less dangerous to the youthful Saviour) pop-
ularity and applause, were neither excited nor occasioned, rre-
mature development would have called forth premature perse-
cution and early death. As matters were arranged by an all-
wise and over-ruling Providence, every thing went quietly on
" until the fulness of time had come."

One might dwell here with great satisfaction, on the lovely
character which the Saviour exhibited, during so long a period,
and in such a humble condition. Conscious of a heavenly ori-
gin and of a dignity above that which belongs to any creature
named in heaven or on earth ; knowing that he possessed pow-
er to fill Palestine with admiration of his deeds and astonish-
ment at his wonderful attributes ; conscious also of a power
which could easily summon countless hosts of angels to his aid,
in c&^e he should fall into danger through the malice of his ene-
mies ; yet he forbore any development of himself, kept on in
his bumble, patient, daily toil for his sustenance, and all this for
years after he had come to a vigorous maturity. This is indeed
a part of his character which has seldom been considered, and
of which little has been said. To my mind, however, it is not
less wonderful, and scarcely less attractive, than the god-like
benevolence whk^h be displayed in the garden of Gethsemane
and on the cross.

I find myself insensibly drawn to moralizing on this shining
and lovely trait in the character of Jesus. Let us return, to our
critical HTvestitgatbns.

350 Oenuineneu of Shtthew L IL [Oct.

I must make a remark on one thing more which Mr. NortoD
has said, in connection with the history of the visit to Bethle-
hem by the Magi. This is, that a divine interposition in re-
spect to giving them an intimation of the birth of a Savioar ii
*^ pretended," and that ^' no purpose worthy of the Deity en
be assigned for it ;" p. lix.

If such a visit did take place on this occasion, a divine iolo^
position seems to be something more than pretence. We 6ai
It, indeed, actually ind'ispensable ; or, in other words, we cm-
not well account for it, considering the time and manner ii
which it happened, in any other way.

Mr. Norton seems to think, that the affiiir of the star wis
merely a business of astrology^ and that it is inoongnioos to
suppose an interposition on the part of heaven in aid of soebi
science. My view of the case is very different. I am not
compelled to believe that these Magi were really astftlf^sfh
in case they were Jews, any more than I am obliged to beliefo
that Daniel was an astrologer because he was a Magus. I
must and do believe, that on the appearance of the star, a dirioe
admonition was given to the minds of the Magi respecting tba
design of it ; Just as one was given to Abraham, to leare Ms
country and kindred and go to Palestine and sojourn there.
The whole account leads to this impression ; and I koov of no
more reason to reject divine interposition here, than in the cues
of it mentioned by Luke, in his Gospel of the Infancy.

And is there '^ no purpose worthy of the Deity" inali thb?
Is it nothing, that this homage was paid to the new-boro Kiogr
by distinguished persons from a distant land ? Nothing— dnt
the Jews of the eastern region should be advertised in Uiis vif
of the birth of a Saviour, as well as those of Palestine ? Nodiios
— ^that his high prerogatives and exalted state should thus be
taught, as well as by the choir of angels on the plains ot
Bethlehem, or by the devout exclamations of Simeon vA
Anna ? And even if wc could not perceive at once, as doobi*
less we cannot, all the purposes to be answered by such an
event, can we not find as much in it that is explicable, as «e
can in the miracle of the water which was turned into wine, or
of the withering of the fig tree which was cursed ; or of the
destruction of the swine on the borders of the lake ? Mr. NoiIob
admits the truth of these miracles; does he see a porposeoT
God in them more explicable and more worthy of the H^^
than in the visit of the Magi ? If he does, I can only say that t
seems more easy to me, to explain the latter than the famv.

1838.] Oenuimneu of Matthew 1. 11. 351

I have said enough, as I would hope, to remove some of the
difficulties which Mr. Norton has thrown in our way, in regard
to this part of Matt. I. II. I come, therefore, to another por-
tion of his remarks.

The beginning of Matt. III. cV ixtlpaig ta7g i^fUQaiSf he
apprehends, may be thought to throw some objections in the
way of commencing the Gospel of Matthew here. In order to
remove this difficulty, however, he supposes, first, that the
translator of Matthew into Greek, or the compiler who added
the two first* chapters to his Gospel, inserted these words as
** a form of transition" from the one narration to the other.
The original Gospel, he thinks, began thus : John the Baptist
came preaching in the mldemesa of Judea ; for this, he says,
is the manner in which the Gospel of Mark begins.

If the reader, however, will take the pains to open his New
Testament at the beginning of Mark, he will find there a
natural introduction to a Gospel, the design of which was only
to give an account of the public ministry of Jesus ; and a very
different one it is, from that which Mr. Norton would here lead
us to suppose. Indeed, the beginning of a Gospel by the
words which he suggests, would be so abrupt, so unintelligible
to a reader who was a stranger to the course of events in Pales-
tine, that che bare recital of it is a sufficient refutation of it.

Mr. Norton himself seems to feel this ; for he immediately
suggests another beginning : In the days ofHerody meaning the
tetrarch of Galilee. So the Gospel of the Ebionites began ;
i only it ran on in such a way as to create no small difficulty in

^ the sequel. " In the days of Herod, King of Judea,'' was its

k commencing clause. Unfortunately for this clause, however,

i this same Herod (the King) bad been dead some twenty^ight

years, when John the Baptist made his appearance in public,
I as immediately stated in the sequel. Mr. Norton thinks that

) Epiphanius, who tells the story of this notable commencement

I ol the Gospel of the Ebionites, " by a blunder of his own added

I the words King of Judea,^^ This is an easy way, to be sure,

r ' to dispose of at least a part of the difficulty. But who does not
I see, that it is merely cutting the knot, not untying it ? If we

' are at liberty to reason thus, and conjecture whatever facts we

I please, (how can I call this reasoning 1) then, deducere aliquid

ex aliquo is fully within the power of every controvertist.
I After all, the beginning of Matthew's Gospel, according to

I Mr. Norton, would be a wonderful beginning-— entirely unique.

352 Oenuineness of Matthew L IL [Oct.

jh]Me days of Herod 1 What Herod ?— -exclaims the mder
at once. Herod the tetrarch^ s^ys Mr. Norton. But bow is
the reader of this Gospel, fifty or more years after all the Herods
•were dead, to know that the tetrarch was meant? There is do
^context, no previous matter to give him a hint of this. There
is no like thing, moreover, in all the Scriptural records. When
the days of a person are mentioned as a point in cbrooologj,
the person meant must necessarily be designated ; above ill,
where many persons about the same time had the same name,
must this be done ; as it is always both in the Old TestamcBt
and in*the New. But if we are to credit Mr. Norton, nothing
of this kind was done by Matthew. Quodcunque mihi Dims
sic — .

' But we have a more serious difficulty still,' according to Hr.
Norton.] \ * If we allow chap. I. U. to be genuine, the last
events mentioned are Archelaus's reign and Joseph's residence
at Nazareth. ... It was not in those days, but thirty yean
afterwards, that John the Baptist was preaching in the wikle^
ness of Judea.'

Indeed ! Archelaus's reign is to be sure mentioned in Shit
2: 22, and as a reason why Joseph repaired to Nazareth, rather
than to Bethlehem. But the chapter ends with an aocouotoT
Joseph's fixing the abode of himself and family at Nazareth, aod
the third chapter begins with the clause, an those daystl^-
plainly and simply, during the period of the abode of bis hoAf
at Nazareth. This comports with simple fact. It was really
and truly what happened, viz., that John entered on bis paUie
ministry while they abode at Nazareth. What " serious diffi-
culty " there can be in all this, I am not able to see. 1 m»
sure Mr. Norton has not succeeded in presenting any. It is act
to Archelaus's reign, but to Joseph's sojourn at Nazareth, to
which ikose days refers.

Mr. Norton says, at the close, that * he thinks these reasoos
ought to satisfy us that the two chapters in question did ooC
proceed from the apostle Matthew.' He then turns to the ex-
amination of the two first chapters of Luke ; and " although,
be suggests, " the style is rather poetical than historical ;" ^
though, " with its real miracles, the fictions of oral traditioo had
probably become blended ;" although, " with our piesenl roeaos
of judging we cannot draw a precise line between thetwthwd
what has been added to the truth ;" yet we may on the whole,
as he concludes, regard the account of this Evangelist as heing
substantially correct.

1838.] Genuineness of Matthew L J7. 353

What kiod of faith we can have in a Gospel which we re-
gard in such a light, is for Mr. Norton to tell us. With such a
faith I am sure we could say nothing more appropriate than
" Lord, help our unbelief!"

But — ^to our immediate purpose. I may now be permitted
to ask, at the close of this examination, by what kind of evi-
dence or process Mr. Norton has laboured to establish his cause ?
What, I ask, is the question before us ? A questfon simply of
lower criticism ; one which respects the mere fact, whether
there is evidence that Matthew i. U. is genuine. And how
are such questions to be decided ? By a priori reasoning ; by
objections of a theological cast ; by our mere estimate of the
probability or improbability of events related ? Surely not.
Whether the story in Matthew I. II. is probable or improbable,
strange or a thing of common occurrence ; whether it teaches
Unitarian or Trinitarian theology ; has nothing at all to do with
the question of criticism, which is simply and only, whether
critical vntnesses speak for or against it.

And what is the result of our inquiries with regard to this last
point ? The result is so clear, that not a doubt of a critical
nature can be sustained. All the known Mss. and Versions on
the face of the earth speak but one language. All the Christian
writers of the primitive ages speak but one language. We can
trace the contents of these chapters in Justin Martyr, in Celsus,
in the Syriac Peshito ; we find Cerinthus using the matter of
them about A. D. 80, before the apostolic age had passed away.
No part of the church, except a small insignificant sect of the
Ebionites, has ever ventured to doubt their genuineness, or to
tamper with them. We have now as it were word for word
and letter for letter, in the Syriac Version (made in the second
'century as we have good reason to believe), the very text which
lies in the canonical Greek Matthew before us. A critical douht
on this subject, can scarcely be less than a critical heresy.

Yet Mr. Norton, passing by all this, suggests internal diffi^
cidties. We have also examined them. We have seen that a
very different estimate from his may be made out from all the
facts as they lie before us. And if it could not, his proof is not
legitimate. We cannot betake ourselves to theologizing, on a
mere subject of lower criticism. The deductions which might
be made out in our own way of reasoning, cannot be shewn to
have been made out by the mind of Matthew. Even if chap.
1. II. of his Gospel have given us erroneous statements, (which

Vol. XII. No. 82. 45

354 Oenuineness of Matthew L U, [Oct.

however I do not believe), yet in the present state of criticisai
we are obliged to attribute these chapters to Matthew. Tlie
question now before us is not whether he has truly said or writ-
ten this or that, or erroneously, but whether he actuaHy said or
wrote it. That question is settled, until some evidence yet un-
known, at any rate yet unproduced, shall be developed, which
will give a new aspect to the whole matter.

At the close of this somewhat protracted investigation, I can-
not refrain from adding a few considerations, which arc quite
different from and opposite to the general nature of those sug-
gested by Mr. Norton, and examined in the preceding pag^.
If they do not go to prove the genuineness of Matthew I. II.,
they may afford some aid in removing suspicion that these
chapters are an interpolation.

It has often been remarked, and truly, that no one of the
Evangelists refers so frequently to the Old Testament, or quotes
from it so often, as Matthew. I say this has been truly observ-
ed ; for Matthew plainly quotes at least thirty-five times from
the ancient Scriptures, while Mark quotes eighteen, liuke
twenty, and John fourteen times. I reckon here only the plain
and obvious cases of quotation* The references in aU the Gos-
pels to sentiments contained in the Old Testament, would add
to the list of appeals to the ancient Scriptures ; but these are
proportionally as frequent in Matthew as in the other Evan-
gelists.

This characteristic in Matthew has been accounted for by
many on the ground that he wrote more immediately for the
benefit of the Jews, to whom frequent appeals to the Old
Testament would be peculiarly gratifying. Matthew, it has
been thought, labours in a peculiar manner to prove the Mes-
siahship of Jesus from the predictions of the Hebrew Scriptures.

Whether these views be well grounded or not, it is still true
that a prominent characteristic in his style is such as has now
been stated. How then does the style or manner of chapten
I. II. compare with this? Just as we should expect it would in
case these chapters were from the hand of Matthew. No less
than five appeals are here made to the Old Testament, viz. in
1: 23. 2: 6. 2: 15. 2: 18. 2; 23. Was it a matter of mere
accident, or even a matter of design, that the supposed inter-
polation, or rather the writer of a narrative which another and
subsequent redactor interpolated, thus imitated the manner of
Matthew ? I verily believe it was neither. There is no
imitation here, but the hand of an original writer.

1838.] Oenuineness of Matthew L 11. 855

Again ; Matthew is the only one of all the evangelists who
has taken any notice of dreams^ as means of divine admonition.
In 27: 19 he tells us of a dream by the wife of Pilate, warning
her that Jesus, accused before the tribunal of her husband, was
innocent. In Matt. 1: 20. 2: 12, 22, we have the like occur-
rences.

Of all the Evangelists or writers of the New Testament,
Matthew is the only one who uses the word ovag, dream.
This is employed in 27: 19, and in all the passages just referred
to in chapters I. II. Is this a mere accidental thing, belonging
to the translator of Matthew, as Mr. Norton would have us
believe ; or does it look like a mode of expression familiar to
the original author of the whole book ?

It would be easy to produce a number of idioms or phrases
employed in chapters I. II. and afterwards in the other part of
Matthew's Gospel, but found no where else in the New Testa-
ment. But I forbear, lest I should tire the patience of my
readers. They may be found in Gersdorf s Beitrdge ; who
has expended incredible labour on the examination of chapters

I. II. Mr. Norton would probably say : ' These peculiarities
belong to the translator of Matthew, and can as well be
accounted for in this way as in any other ?' Yet some of them
are of such a nature, that I should doubt whether this could be
made credible. They seem to characterize o^riginal composition
rather than translation.

Thus have I gone through with the details of this subject \
and I now submit the whole to the reader, and to Mr. Nortoa
himself, and ask the question, whether any reader of Matt. I..

II. and of the rest of his Gospel, would have ever thought that
the whole book is a translation from another language, or that
difierent parts of it were composed by different writers,, unless
some doubts about the facts in chapters I. II. had set him to
making an effort to get rid of this part of the book ? After
reading again and again, in order to see whether I could detect
any sensible. difference in style, language^ mode of thinkings
order and manner of narrating, or even in the use of the
small particles of transition, etc., I must confess unhesitatingly
that I have been able to discover no such difference. Nor can
I think Mr. Norton himself, who appears to understand the laws,
of lower criticism so well, would ever have doubted, if some
a priori views of what Matthew ought, or ought not, to connL<v
prise in his Gospel, had not led biin to. doubt.

356 ScriptunU Idea ofAngeh* [Oct.

I cannot resist the persuasion, that if there be a clear case io
respect to the genuineness of any passage of the New Testa-
ment which has ever beencontroverted, the one before us is socfa
a case. Most fully do I assent to the words of Griesbacb, at the
close of his critical examination of this subject (Cotnm. Crit.
11. 55), who says : " Cum igitur parum roboris insit argumeads
omnibus adversus duorum istorum capitum authentiam proiatis,
genvina ea esse censemus ; ipsaque inde ab initio, cum primum
In publioam lucem emitteretur Matthaei Evangeliuoi, buic
adhaesisse, ac in autographo sen archetypo jam exiitisse^ mdU

ARTICLE V.
The Scriptural Idea of Angels.

By Lewii Hajrer, D. Di late Prof, in tba Tbaol. Sem. of the Germ. 2mf, Choieb, York, Fk.

The existence of a world of spirit is as much a subject of
observation and experience as the existence of a worid of mat-
ter. The human soul is a spirit manifesting itself in the auc-
tions and operations of mind ; there is a spirit in the bnite
which is the seat of sensation, of memory, of pleasure and of
pain ; the reproduction of animals, the vegetation of plants, tbe
crystalization of minerals, and chemical agencies, are nol tbe
effects of inert matter, but must be referred ultimately to a
cause which acts spontaneously aud rationally. Ancient phi-
losophy conceived that cause to be a soul of the wchtM, and
considered the worid an animated, sentient, and rational being.
The Bible makes it God, and the spirit of God, which pervadei
all things.

All spirit is not of tbe same order. There is an infinite
difference, both of nature and of attributes, between the un-
created infinite Spirit, and all created finite spirit. There may
also be an order of spirits among the creatures, perhaps em-
bracing many genera and species, superior to man, and existing
in a state of being which is not subject to the observation of
our senses ; nor, perhaps, even to be apprehended by tbe bu-
ixian mind, in its present connection with matter.

That intelligent creatures, superior to man, and still at an

1838.] Scriptural LUa of Angels. 357

infinite distance from God, may exist, is a position which rea-
son cannot disprove. The fact, however, of their existence
does not follow of course from the possibility of it. Neither
do I know that it can be demonstrated by reasoning from any
abstract principle. All that reason can do is to make out a high
degree of probability by analogical argument from facts previ-
ously known or granted. It is of little weight to say, that
inasmuch as the distance between man and the Deity is infinite,
it is improbable that man is the highest of animated beings, and
the only creature which is endowed with reason ; for, what-
ever conception we may form of rational creatures, superior to
man, to occupy the chasm between him and his Creator, the
distance between those creatures and the Deity niust still be
infinite, and the same necessity of supposing others above them
will return forever. It may then be urged, that, as no creation
can be infinite, it must be admitted that the Creator has stop-
ped somewhere ; and no sufficient reason can be given, why he
should not have stopped at man, as well as at any conceivable
grade in the scale ot existence above him.

The argument from analogy is of more value. It may be
constructed as follows. It is probable that the other planets, in
the system of which our globe is a part, are inhabited by living
creatures ; because in our world every part teems with life and
activity ; the earth, the air, and the water abound with animated
beings ; the microscope reveals to us a world of animalcules, in
immense variety of form, of character, and of magnitude,
beyond the limits which confine the unassisted sense, and ex-
tending in minuteness beyond the bounds even of microscopic
vision ; often so numerous that many thousands of them are
contained in a single drop of water ; and so minute that they
find room enough in it to move and to sport without hind-
rance. Yea, such is the Creator's attention to the production
and sustenance of living existence, that even the food of many
of the larger animals is animated ; and these again constitute so
many worlds upon which smaller species live and feed. It is
therefore probable that the other globes in the solar system,
which are known to be subject, in other respects, to the same
general laws as our own, are not left destitute of living crea-
tures. If each of the fixed stars, which are known to resemble
our sun, is the centre of another system of worlds, and the
source of light and heat to globes that revolve around 'it, it is
also probable that those worlds are the habitations of living and

358 Scriptural Idea of Angeb. [Oct.

sensitive beings. But if all the heavenly bodies, like the globe
upon which we dwell, are fiirnished with living creatures, it b
not probable that all their inhabitants are irrational animals,
which can have no knowledge of their Creator, and can bring
to him no offering of virtue and praise. In this world man b
the lord of the lower creation ; all the inferior creatures are
adapted to his use, and subjected to his power ; and there b a
gradation in the scale of existence, through various forms of
organization and character, from rude matter up to man, who b
constituted an image of his Creator, and forms the link which
connects this world with the invisible Deity. If other worlds
are analogous to our own, there must be in them the same sort
of gradation, terminating in a highest which represents God,
and connects them with him.

If there be rational beings in other worlds, it is not likely
that they are of the same order and species with man. The
human race could not subsist in any other of the planets which
are known to us. In Mercury, for example, they would be
consumed with heat, and in Herschel destroyed by cold ; and in
none of the planets can there be vegetation or animals like those
with which we are acquainted here. If those bodies are in-
habited, it must be by natures that are adapted to them, and
are therefore wholly different from any which are known to us:
and if in each of them there be a class of beings upon which the
image of God is impressed, it must be one that difiers entirdy
from the human race.

If man is not the only intelligent creature in the universe,
and if every other world contains a distinct order of the same
class, it is very improbable that they are all equal with respect
to their physical and intellectual powers. As far as our ob-
servation extends in the works of God, we discover diversity
united with regularity. All organized being is reducible to
classes, orders, genera, species, and varieties ; no two individ-
uals of a species are in all respects alike ; there is everywhere
a continual variation, and a rising from the less in perfection to
the greater, or a descending from the greater to the less ; there
is an oak and a moss, a lion and a worm, an eagle and a mite ;
there is a sun to illuminate a system of worlds, and a meteor to
shine momentarily in the dark. The human species is diversi-
fied by every variety of beauty and deformity, and by every
grade of rank from the king to the beggar, and from the sage
to the idiot. If the same law prevails throughout the universe,

1838«] Scriptural Mea of Angds. 359

DO two worlds can be alike, and there are, doubtless, as many
difierent grades of intelligent bebgs as there are worlds which
they inhabit.

Neither is it probable that man is the highest in this class of
creatures. On the contrary it is more likely that he is the
lowest in the scale. A compound of spirit and matter, and of
matter in its gross sluggish form, he is allied to the earth on
which he treads, and the connecting links between him and its
rude matter are the brute, the plant, and the crystalization«
While some of the individuals of the species exhibit intellectual
powers of a high order, others are so little removed from the
more sagacious of the irrational animals, that the transition from
the one to the other is made by a single step. We may
therefore conclude, that, if there be among the creatures of
God other grades of intelligent beings, they are higher than
man.

All this reasoning is hypothetical ; we assume in it, on proba-*
ble grounds, what we cannot strictly demonstrate. From such

f remises the conclusion can be nothing more than probability^
t is however a high degree of probability that is obtained in
this case ; and there being no argument of equal weiglit, nor^
so far as I can see, of any considerable weight, on the opposite
side, we approach so near to certainty, that we may take the
fact as sufficiently proved.

The religious pliilosophy of every age, in the Gentile worlds
has taught the existence of a class of beings between the su-
preme Deity and man. In the theology of all idolatrous na-
tions, as there was a plurality of divinities to whom their wor-*
ship was addressed, so there was a subordination of rank among
the objects of worship, and one supreme deity that presided
over the rest ; and among the inferior gods there were such as
approached very near to man, while others scarcely differed
from the one who was acknowledged as supreme. But besides
these inferior beings, to whom the title gods was given, the
Gentiles held the existence of a class of beings between the
gods and men, consisting of different orders, who were the
ministers of the gods, and mediators between them and men ^
bearing to the gods the prayers and offerings of men ; and to
men the answers and the commands of the god^. The Hindoos
have their Dejotas, the Persians, and others of the Magian
sect, their Amschashpands, Izeds, Fervers, and Dews ; the
Greeks bad their Daemons, and the Romans their 6enii«

360 Scriptural Idea ofAngeb. [Oct.

Hesiod, who lived about the time of Homery divides inteUigent
natures into four classes, namely, gods, daemons, heroes, and
men. For so doing he is commended by Plutarch. Fhu>
taught that the whole space between the gods and men was
occupied by daemons, which were, however, of different
The Pythagoreans, the Stoics, the Peripatetics, and,
every sect of philosophy among the Gentiles, except the
Epicurean, held a similar doctrine.

In the Holy Scriptures we have frequent notice of sptritnal
intelligences, existing in another state of being, and constituting
a celestial family, a hierarchy, over which Jehovah preades.
The Scripture, however, does not treat this subject professedly,
and as a doctrine of religion, but adverts to it mcidentally as a
fact, as it does to other facts, in its religious history and the
course of its instructions. It speaks of no obligations to these
spirits, and inculcates no duties toward them. A belief in the
existence of such beings is therefore not an essential article of
religion, any more than a belief that there are other worids be-
sides our own ; it belongs not so much to religion as to philoso-
phy ; but such a belief serves to enlarge our idea of the works
of God, and to illustrate the greatness of his power and wisdom ;
and in this way it exerts an important and salutary inflaenoe
upon the heart.

The names or titles, by which the Scripture designates these
celestial beings, are spirits, Chrctk nvivfiata pneumata ; angels,
OrttkayyiXoi^ angeUoi ; Hebrew Q^btt mlakkim ; and in the Old
Testament &v6m and tr^vt '^li elohim. and bfu eloAim. The
first of these terms has respect to their essence, and the second
to their office. The last two denote their rank in the scale of
being. Oesenitu denies that elohim ever means angek ; and
he refers in this denial particularly to Ps. 8: 5, and Ps. 97: 7 ;
but he observes, that the term is so translated in the ancieDt
versions. In the epistle to the Hebrews, where these texts are
referred to, the same translation is given, Heb. 1: 6. S: 7.

Elohim is the plural of Eloah. According to Gesenius Eioak
is a primitive, and the verb Alah is a derivative from it. The
' verb does not occur in the Hebrew Scriptures, but ts used in
the Arabic, in the sense of io reverence^ to dread. Eloah b
therefore that which inspires reverence, fear, dread ; or which
creates astonishment, alarm and awe ; and Elohim, in its ordi-
nary sense, denotes a plurality of such objects. When the phi-
ral is joined with a verb, or with other dependent words, in the

1838.] Scriptural Idea of Angds. 361

singular, it is called the plural of excellency, and has a singular
meaning, with the secondary idea of greatness or superiority.
In this form, it is usually applied to the truO' God ; but some-
times also to an idol ; as to Dagon the god of the Philistines,
Judges 16: 23 ; to Ashtoret, the goddess of the Zidonians, to
Chemosh the god of the Moabites, to Milcom the god of the
Ammonites, 1 Kings 11: 33; and to Bael-zebub the god of
Ekron, SKings 1:2,3. With plural adjuncts it is usually
translated as a plural ; but in some instances the pluralis exceU
lentiae occurs in this form, and is applied to the true God. See
Genesis 20: 13, 31: 53. 2 Samuel 7: 23. Ps. 58: 12.

Elohim is applied to the true God, Gen. 1: 1, etc., and in
very many places. It is applied to idols with the same fre-

?uency, but usually with plural adjuncts. Ps. 96: 5, tt passim.
lulers, and especially kings, are called elohim, Ps. 45: 6, 7.
82: 1, 6. 138: 1. Exodus 22: 28. In ] Samuel 28: 13, an
apparition is so called : " And the woman said unto Saul, I saw
gods ascend out of the earth ;'' Hebrew, ** I saw elohim etc."
In Ps. 8: 5, celestial spirits are called elohim : and in Judges
13: 21, 22, the pluralis excellentiae of this term is used in
speaking of a single angel of the Lord ; as in 1 Samuel 28: 13,
of a single apparition.

It appears from this usage that the title elohim is a common
appellation, given to a class of beings who are the objects of fear,
of reverence, and of dread to men. Its application to kings and
rulers is a tropical use of it : in its ordinary acceptation it
designates invisible beings, superior to man, existing in another
state of being. Such is Jehovah ; such are angels ; such the
gods of the Gentiles were believed to be ; and such, in the
opinion of the Gentiles, were the departed souls of eminent men.
Such the witch at Endor considered the ghost of Samuel, which,
to her astonishment, appeared at her bidding. This title did
not distinguish the true God from other elohim ; not always
even when used as a plural of excellency. For the purpose of
distinction be is called the living God, elohim chajimy and eio-
him chaiy in opposition to the gods of the Gentiles, which were
either inanimate objects, as the stars, the elments, etc. ; or dead
men, the souls of deceased ancestors : and from all other elohim
he is distinguished by the title Lord God ; in the Hebrew text,
Jehovah Elohim. So Moses taught the Israelites, ^' Hear, O
Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord." Hebrew^ ^^ Jehovah
our elohim is one Jehovah ;" that is, Jehovah, the object of oar
Vol. XII. No. 32. 46

362 ScriptHTd Idea of Angeb. [Oct.

reverence, is an only being, Deut. 6: 4. lo the nioetj-siztb
Psalm, the inspired author says, '^ For the Lord is great, and
greatly to be praised ; he is to be feared above all gods."
HebreWy '^ For Jehovah is great, and greatly to be praised ; be
is to be feared above all elohim :" which implies that all elobim
are objects of fear, but none of them in the same degree, dot
with the same propriety and justice, as Jehovah. The dis-
tinctive titles D'»nbK Q^h and Q'^nbet ■'n Elohim chqjimy and JSUo-
him chai, living God, and JehovaK Elohim, Jehovah our Elo-
him, etc., are of frequent occurrence in the Old Testament.

The tropical use of elohim, as a title of kings and other nileis,
was founded in the profound and superstitious veneratioii with
which the people regarded the ruling powers. Rulers lo an-
cient times were always of the nobility, whom the common peo-
ple were accustomed from their childhood to consider a supe-
rior order of men, possessing a portion of divinity, and naturally
and necessarily above them ; and kings, abounding in riches, in-
vested with absolute power, and glittering in splendor, were
considered so near the gods, that they were esteemed worthy
of honors that differed but little from religious adoration. The
title elohim, which was often given to them in common with
the objects of worship, designated them as beings that inspired
veneration and awe similar to that which was inspired by the
gods themselves. So the ancient Greeks derived both the
authority of their kings, and their ability to administer the gov-
ernment; their bodily strength, stature, and beauty ; their cour-
age, enterprise, and wisdom, from Jupiter, and digni6ed them
with the titles of theoeides ^^oiidnQj isotheos ioo^^o^, godlike,
and diogenes ^loyevr^g, heaven-bom, bora of Jupiter. See
Creutzer's Symbolik und Mythohgie der alien Voelker. Vol.
3. B. 3. Cap. 1.

The customary use of the plural elohim, and the extensive
application of it, seems to have had its origin in the polyth^sn
of the people who spoke the language. The Hebrew was not
exclusively the language of the Israelites ; neither was it even
originally theirs. It was one of the dialects of a common lao*
guage which was spoken by the nations that inhabited the coun-
tries of western Asia, between Persia and the Mediterranean, and
between Armenia and the Indian ocean. The other dialects
were the Chaldean, the Syriac, and the Arabic. Hebrew wis
the dialect of the Canaanites, including the Phenicians. AH
these nations were poly theists. Abraham was a native of Ur is

1838.] Scriptural Idea ofAngeb. 363

Cbaldea, and was seventy-five years of age when he went into
the land of Canaan. In bis time these several dialects might
differ but little ; but if there was any difference, he spoke the
Chaldean, and not the Canaanitish. During their long resi-
dence in Canaan his descendants acquired the language of this
country, and, of course, learned it as it was. They did not
originate its usages, but adopted them as they found them al-
ready settled. It was the language of poly theists. So, indeed,
were all the dialects. In the time of Moses, when the first of
the sacred books were written, all these countries were im-*
mersed in the grossest idolatry. They had not only their £/o-
ahy but their Elohim ; and these were found in every thing in
heaven, and on earth, and under the earth, which was adapted
to excite fear, dread, or hope, or could create astonishment or
admiration. A polythebtic language was now used to express
monotheistic ideas.

I will now examine the texts in which the term ehhim^ or
bne elohim^ designates celestial spirits, distinct from Jehovah,
and superior to man.

Ps. 8: 3 — 8, " When I consider thy heavens, the work of
thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained ;
what is man, that thou art mindful of him ? and the son of man
that thou visitest him ? For thou hast made him a little lower
than the angels, and hast crowned him with glory and honor.
Thou madest bim to have dominion over the works of tby-
hands ; thou hast put all things under his feet : all sheep and
oxen, yea, and the beasts of the field ; the fowl of the air, and
the fishes of the sea, and whatsoever passeth through the paths
of the sea." ** For thou hast made him a little lower than the
angeb" is in the Hebrew text, ^^ For thou hast made him a
litde lower than the elohim.^' By elohim the ancient as well
as the modem translators understood those spirits whom we call
angels. So also the author of the epistle to the Hebrews un-
derstood the word. The connection, moreover, demands this
interpretation. We have in the text God, the Creator, distin-
guished from all his works ; who is addressed, in the first verse,
as Jehovah our Lord, whose name is excellent in all the earth,
whose glory is above the grandeur of the starry heavens, and in
comparison with whom man is as nothing. We have next the
noblest of bb creatures in the visible world, man, whom be has
crowned with glory and honor, and has placed over the worka

364 Scriptural Hea of Angels. [Oct.

of his hands in the earth, the air, and the seas. We have last-
ly the elobim, whom man resembles, but does not equal. Thej
must therefore be an order of intelligent beings above bim : if
they are not such, what are they ? What can be higher than
man, but a more perfect intelligence ? Man was made a little
lower than the elohim. There cannot, therefore, be a great
chasm between htm and them ; as there is between bim and
the Deity. There may be many orders of elohim, or many
genera and species of the same order, some of which may be
immeasurably above humanity, and may approach much nearer
to the Deity ; Vet as a class of superior beings, there is among
them a point of comparison in which man b but a little lower
than they.

Grenesis 3: 1 — 5, ^' Now the serpent was more subtle than
any beast of the field which the Lord God had made : and be
said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of
any tree of the garden ? And the woman said, we may eat of
the fruit of the trees of the garden : but as to the fmit of the
tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said. Ye
shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die. And
the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die ; fcr
God knowetb, that in the day ye eat thereof, your eyes shall
be opened : and ye shall be as gods knowing good and evil."

Throughout this and the preceding chapter, whilst the histo-
rian speaks, the name of God, in the Hebrew text, is Jehwah
Elohtm ; in the conversation only between the woman and the
serpent, it is simply Elohim^ in the pluralis exceUentiae^ with
the verb or the participle in the singular : — ** hath Elohim said ?
— ^* Elohim hath said" — ** Elohim is knowing that." In the
last sentence, " Ye shall be as elohim, knowing good and evil,"
the participle knounng is plural, which, according to the oom-
mon usage, makes elohim, with which it is in agreement, a com-
mon plural. The authors of the English version very justly
considered it such, and translated keelohim, 0Tf^K3 , by asgodsy
The Greek version of the Seventy also rendered it in the same
sense ot theoi, oi ^«o?, as gods.

Eve, in all her simplicity, could not be so stupid as to ima-
gine, that, by eating of the fruit of a tree which God had crea-
ted, she could become like bim ; but she might conceive it pos-
sible that she could attain to the state of other created beings,
who were then advanced above her. It is implied in the text,
that she had a knowledge of the existence of such an order of

1838.] Scriptural Idea ofAngeb. 86&

beings ; and thb is, doubtless, in itself very probable. In that
state of innocence) when they were accustomed to the sound of
Crod walking in the garden, and so familiar an intercourse sub-
sisted between heaven and earth, it is certainly not unlikely,
that the first human pair were favored with angels' visits, and
therefore knew what angels were : they saw their coming and
their departure, and perceived that they were intelligences of a
higher order.

The superiority of the elohim, to which the tempter directed
Eve's attention, consisted in this, that their eyes were open^
and they knew good and evil. The latter is the consequence
of the former; if their eyes were open, then they knew good
and evil.

The phrase, to know good and evil, means to know all
things, and to know them in such a manner as to be able to
distinguish one thing from another. A similar phraseology
occurs 2 Sam. 14: 7, where the woman of Tekoah says to
David, " The word of my lord, the king, shall now be com-
fortable ; for as an angel of God, so is my lord, the king, to
discern good and bad." And again in verse ^, '^ And my
lord is wise, according to the wisdom of an angel of God, to
know all things that are in the earth." All things that are in
the earth include both the good and the evil things. To know
good and evil, is therefore to know all things, and to be able to
discern good and bad among them. Of this knowledge the
tree in the midst of the garden seems to have been a symbol ;
and the prohibition of its fruit - to our first parents may have
signified, that there were things which it would not be safe for
them to know ; and they must therefore restrain their curiosity,
and be content with such knowledge as God would choose to
teach them. It was an idea of antiquity that knowledge had
introduced vice and misery into the world ; and Solomon says,
'^ Lo, this only have I found, that God made man upright ; but
they have sought out many inventions," Elcc. 7: 29; by which
he means, that their discoveries had injured their virtue, and
marred their happiness. But the tempter represented, that
the elohim, possessing the knowledge of good and evil, were,
by virtue of it, happier than man, and solicited Eve to aspire to
an equality with them in this higher felicity.

Genesis 3: 22, '< And Jehovah said, Behold, the man is be-
come as one of us, to know good and evil ; and now, lest he
put forth hb hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat.

7

866 Scriptural Idea ofAngeU^ [Oct.

and live forever ; therefore the Lord (Sod f Jehovah Elohim)
sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from
which he was taken."

^' The man is hecome like one of us ;" i. e. like one of the
elohim ; certainly not like Jehovah, nor like one of the three io
the Godhead. As yet the likeness was only in the attribute of
knowledge, in which they had made an advance that was,
however, fatal to their happiness. Another, in which it might
be attained, if they should be permitted to continue io tiie
garden, was immortality ; and this was prevented by seodiDg
them forth to till the ground. All this is symbolical language,
adapted to the simplicity of a primitive age ; and its literal sense
must not be closely pressed. What we learn from it, so far as
; I our present purpose is concerned, is, that there is an order of
celestial beings, dwelling with God, who possess superior
knowledge and are immortal.

Ps. 97: 7, 9, '^ Confounded be all they that worship graven
images, that boast themselves of idols ; worship him, all je

Sods," {Hebrew all ye elohim.) — ^**For thou Lord, (flici.
ehovah,) art high above all the earth ; thou art exalted fiir
above all gods," {Heb. all elohim.) The Greek version of
the Seventy renders, elohim in verse 7 by angeUoi atctoM,
£yyiko$ avtov his angek ; and in verse 9, by iheoi ^lol Gods.
The epistle to the Hebrews cites the last clause of verse 7 thus,
'' Let all the angels of God worship him." Heb. 1: 6. These
authorities show that the aocient Jews, and the inspired writen
of the New Testament, understood the term elohim to include
angels. In this text they took it to mean angels only ; because
they considered the gods of the Gentiles dead things and nullities,
and could not conceive that an exhortation to worship Jehovah
should be addressed to them. In verse 9, the Setenty appear
to have taken elohim in its widest sense as meaning whatever
is an object of reverence to man ; so that the text might read
thus : ^^ For thou, Jehovah, art high above all the earth ; tbou
art exalted far above every object of reverence."

Genesis 1: 26, 27. Retaining the Hebrew appeUation, the
text reads thus : " And Elohim said. Let us make man in our
image, after our likeness ; and let them have dominion, etc.
So Elohim created man in his image ; in the image of elobiffl
created he him, etc." Throughout this chapter, and the first
three verses of the second chapter, the name of God is uoiformly
EUohim, in the plural of excellency, having the verb and pio-

1838.] Scriptural Idea of Angels. 967

noun in the singalar ; but in the last recited clause, ^* in the
image of elohiin created he him/' there is nothing to make
elobim ^pluralis excellentiae ; and taking it in connection with '
the phraseology of verse 26, '' Let us make man in our image,
after our likeness," it appears to be a common plural, and to
man the celestial spirits, whom the supreme Elobim, the
Creator, addresses. Here the generic term elobim is 6rst ap- I
plied to God, the Creator, and next to that order of intelligent I
beings who constitute the celestial family over which God pre*
sides. When God made roan, be did not take for his pattern
any of the lower animals which bad been previously created ;
but he took himself, and the elobim, who dwelt with him, and
who, like himself, were intellectual natures ; and man was thus
made in the likeness of bis Creator, and in the likeness of the
elobim, who bore his image, and enjoyed fellowship with him. j
The words, ^^ Let us make man, etc." are addressed to these
celestial beings ; God is conceived as a Sovereign sitting in
council with his princes and people, in the manner of primitive
antiquity, when kings were the fathers of their people, and did
nothing without their consent. The language of the text is
poetic ; the conception is symbolical, designed for embellish-
ment and efiect. A similar trope occurs 1 Kings 22: 19 — 22,
and Isaiah 6: 1,8.

Job 38: 4, 7, " Where wast thou when I laid the foundations
of tbe earth ? Declare, if thou hast understanding." — " When
the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God
shouted for joy." Sons of God is in the original bne elohim,
&*^nbM '*z^ sons of elobim, or sons of the elobim. The time
referred to is tbe time of the creation of the world, when Je-
hovah laid the foundation of the earth. It is manifest that the
morning stars and the sons of the elobim are tbe same. They
were present when tbe heavens and the earth were created, and
celebrated that great event with song and joyous acclamation*
They must therefore be rational beings who existed before tbe
creation of man. The sons of elobim cannot be a mere poetb
personification of the stars ; for these were not in existence
when creation began ; and only one star, moreover, is the
morning star. Sons of the elohitn seems to be an idiomatic
phrase for elohitn; like sons of men, for men, Ps. 4: 2. Sons
of my people for my people. Gen. S3: 11. Sons of stran^ersy
for strangers f Isaiah 56: 6. Sons of the Chredans, for Chrecians,
Joel 3: 6. Sons of the mighty j (bne elim ^» na) for the

36S Scriptural Idea of AngtU. [Oct.

m^&fy, a title given to the inhabitants of heaveo, the aiigds, ii
Ps. 89: 6.

Job 1: 6, and 2: 1, '^ Now there was on a day when thesoos
of God {bne hadohim^ sons of the elobim), came to present them-
selves before the Lord, (before Jehovah), and Sieitan (the sd-
versary) came also among them." — " Again there was a dqr
when the sons of God (bne haelohim, sons of the elohim) came
to present themselves before the Lord, (before Jehovah), aad
Satan came also among them to present himself before the
Lord," (before Jehovah).

The name of Grod, in these chapters, when be is distingoisb-
ed from other elohim, is Jehovah. Those who came to pie*
sent themselves before him are not called sons of Jehovah, bat
sons of the elohim. The sense of the terms, sons of the elohiffl,
is determined by the parallel place in chapter 38: 7, and
must therefore be admitted here. The sons of the elofaim,
who came to present themselves before Jehovah, are the same
that sang together and shouted for joy, when he laid the fouoda-
tions of the earth. The scene is laid in heaven, in the hoose
of God. The idea is that of a day of audience and inqiiiiy,
when the chief men of the kingdom came to pay their hcxnage
to the sovereign, and inquisition is made concerning the afiiis
of the kingdom. Satan, who is one of the number, but suspi-
cious and malevolent, comes with the sons of the elohim to pre-
sent himself before Jehovah, having walked as a spy tbrougii
the earth, and being resolved to denounce a good man whose
sincerity he suspected.

Daniel 3: 24, 25, 28, Nebuchadnezzar, having ordered Sha-
drach, Meshach, and Abednego to be cast into the fiery ft>
nace, and seeing four men, loose and unhurt, walking in the
midst of the flames, rose up in haste, and said to hiscounedlois,
*^ Did we not cast three men bound into the midst of the fiie?
They answered and said unto the king. True, O king. He an-
swered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst
of the fire, and they have no hurt ; and the form of the feurtb
is like the son of God." But in the original the words aie,
*^ like a son ofelahin ]'^n^^-*n^b, elahin being the Chaldeeibna
of elohim. And this son of elakin is in verse 28 called an an*
gel of God. '^^ Blessed be the God of Shadrach, Mesbacb,aiMi
Abednego, who hath sent his angel and delivered his servaots.**

In our language we have no word corresponding to the He-
brew term elohim. It answers nearly to the Greek liatMoa;

1 838.] Scriptural Idea of Angels. 369

or daimonian the neuter of the adjective daimontoSy diviDe. In
the usage of Homer, and other Greeks, dattnon, or daimonian
is a divinity ; to daimonion is the supreme God ; and daimones
or daimonia is equivalent to theoif gods ; but in Hesiod and
others it denotes a class as middle beings between the gods and
men.^ The appropriate term in English for the celestial
intelligences distinct from Jehovah, is Angels ; by which we
translate the Hebrew Mlakim U'^Ajis > ^d^ ^^e Greek AngeUoi
ay/iXoi, Both the Hebrew and the Greek term signifies
messengers* Under this title this order of beings is so often
mentioned, both in the Old and the New Testament, that it b
unnecessary to produce the Scripture testimony.

The title nUakim, angelloif messengers, does not indicate
either the grade or the nature of the heavenly intelligences, but
the office in which they are employed. They uniformly ap-
pear in the Bible as the ministers of God, who do bis pleasure.
The author of the epistle to the Hebrews says of them, '' Are
they not all ministerincr spirits, sent forth to minister unto them
who shall be heirs of salvation ?" Heb. 1: 14. In the Old
Testament, David thus invokes them, ^^ Bless Jehovah, ye his
angels, that excel in strength, that do his commandments,
hearkening unto the voice of his word. Bless Jehovah, all
ye his hosts, ye ministers of his that do his pleasure,'^ Ps. 103:
SO, 21. And Daniel speaks of them as ministering to, and
standing before God, in allusion to the custom of oriental
courts, where the officers of the monarch stood before him,
ready to receive and to execute his commands, Dan. 7: 10.
Thb idea of angels pervades both the Old and the New Testa-
ment ; and on this account the terms ndakim and angelloi are
those which are most frequently used to designate this order of
beings.

This title, however, is used in the Scriptures with as much
latitude as the title eloMm. As elohim designates whatever is
an object of reverence to man, so malak^ angellos, angely
denotes whatever God chooses to employ in order to execute
bis purpose, or to manifest his presence or his power. It is
applied to priests, Malachi 2: 7, where the Hebrew text reads,
*^ The lips of the priest should keep knowledge ; for he is the
angel {malaJCf) of Jehovah of hosts." In Malachi 3: 1, both

* Creutzer's Symbolik und Mythologie der Alten Voelker. VoL III.
Vol. XIL No. 32. 47

370 Scriptural Idea of Angels. [Oct.

John the Baptist, and the Messiah are designated by this tick;
the one as the angel who should prepare the way of the Lord,
and the other as the angel of Jehovah's covenant. In FMni
104: 4 the Hebrew text says, '^ He maketh winds his aogeb,
and flaming fire his ministers." In Psalm 78: 49, the plagues
of Egypt are called " evil angels.'* In 2 Samuel, 24: 15, we
are told, '^ So the Lord sent a pestilence upon Israel from the
morning even to the time appointed ; and there died of the
people from Dan even to Beersheba seventy thousand men.''
And in verse 16 and 17, this pestilence is personified as in
" angel that stretched out his hand upon Jerusalem to destroy
it," and " the angel that smote the people." In 2 Kings 19:
35, the pestilence which destroyed the Assyrian army ia one
night is called ^^ the angel of the Lord." In Exodus 3: 2, the
angel of Jehovah appeared to Moses in a flame of fire in a bush;
and this angel called himself the God of Abraham, and of Isaac,
and of Jacob. What Moses saw was the flame of fire in the
bush ; this he calls the angel of Jehovah, because it was the
symbol of Jehovah's presence. So in Exodus 14: 19, the
symbol of the divine presence, that guided the Israelites io their
joumev from Egypt, is first called the angel of (Sod, which
went before the camp of Israel," and presently afterwards^
^^ the pillar of the cloud, that went before their face," aod io
verse 24, it is Jehovah himself that looks thcottgtrthe pillar of
fire and of the cloud. In Dan. 6: 22, the prophet says, ^'Mj
God hath sent his angel, and bath shut the lions' mouths, that
they have not hurt me." Yet no angel appeared to him ; bat
there was a manifestation of the presence and the power of
God in the fact that the lions' had not hurt him. Many other
examples might be cited. In such cases the Gentiles thought
of the presence of some one of their gods ; whatever was
wonderful, or strange, or unaccountable, was referred to the
immediate agency of some divinity ; the Israelites ascribed such
events to angels, whom they considered the mere instnuneDis
of Jehovah.

This custom of the Jews has been urged as a ground of sus-
picion that angels have no real existence, but are mere peROoi-
fications of unknown powers of nature. The argument, how-
ever, is unsound. The idea of angels, and of their power aod
their ministry, was doubtless entertained before men thought
they found them in the phenomena of natural operatknis aod the

1838.] Scriptural Idea ofjingeb. 871

events of divine providence. We have already seen that the
existence of such beings is, in a very high degree, probable, inde-
pendent of any authority of revelation ; and if a record, professing
to be a repository of revelations from God to man, contains notices
of angels, there is therefore the strongest previous presumption in
favor of the literal sense of such notices. If it appear that in
some places the record does not mean intellectual beings, when it
speaks of angels, thb is of small account, unless it can be shown
that every other place b, at least, susceptible of the same ex-

?lanation ; but in very numerous instances this is not the case.
I^hen angeb actually appeared, conversed with men, and de-
livered messages from God, as Genesb 16: 7 — 12. Luke 1:
11 — ^20. 26—38. Luke 2:8 — 14, and many other places, no
rule of exegesis will permit us to resolve the facts into personi-
6cations, or oriental embellishments. All the sacred writers,
who make mention of angels, proceed in their narrations, or
their discourses, upon the supposition that angels are real beings.
Jesus speaks of them as such Matt. 18: 10, 25, 31. 26: 53.
So also hb apostles. Matt. 28: 2—5. Mark 16: 6, 7. Luke 24:
4 — 7, 23. John 20: 12, et passim. In the epistle to the
Hebrews, the inspired author designs to show the high dignity
of the blessed Redeemer ; and for this purpose he argues that
be b superior to angels. There would be no fierce, and, in-
deed, no decency in his argument, if angels were not real
beings, or if they were not beings of a higher order than man.

The term spirit, in the Greek text pneuma nvivfAa, in He*
brew ruach TVi^ , has respect to the nature of angels, and desig-
nates them as incorporeal and invisible essences. But neither
the Hebrew ruachy nor the Greek pieuma, nor, I ma^ add, the
Latin fptn/ui, corresponds exactly to the English sptriU The
English term spirit b opposed to matter, and designates what
b immaterial ; the other terms were not opposed to mattes,
but to body, and signified, not what b immaterial, but what is
incorporeal. The ancients had not the modem philosophical
idea of spirit ; they conceived spirits to be incorporeal, and iuf*
vbible, but not immaterial, and supposed their essence to be »
pure air, or a subtil fire. The proper meaning of pn/euma 13^
air in motion, wind, breath ; from pneo nvto), I blow,.! breathe.
The Hebrew ruach n^"v, is of the same import. So also the
Latin spirittLSf from spiroy I blow, I breathe. We must not be
deceived by the apparent identity of words in ancient writings
with words in modem use, even when the language b the same«

872 Scriptural Idea ofAngeU. [Oct.

Ideas of things change in the progress or the decline of koowl-
edge, while the same words continue in use to express them.
The modem idea of spirit is not derived from the Scriptores ;
it is a product of philosophy ; obtained not by revelatioo, bat
by abstraction. The student of mathematics learns by abstrac-
tion to conceive a point without bigness, a line without breadth,
and a surface without thickness. So in metaphysics we form
the idea of a substance without parts. When Jesus said,
'^ God is a spirit ; and they that worship him, must worship
him in spirit and in truth,'' 1 have no doubt be meant, that
God is a purely immaterial being; but when be used the term
mtwnaj those who heard him would connect with it no other
idea than that with which they bad previously been acquainted;
and he was necessitated to leave them and their suocessois,
with regard both to this and to other subjects, to the dow
progress of intellectual culture and development.

When the ancient Jews called angels spirits, they did not
intend by that term to deny that they were endued with bodies.
If they affirmed that spirits are incorporeal, they used the term
in the sense in which it was understood by the ancients ; that
b, as free from the properties of gross matter.* St. Paul dis*
tinguishes between a natural body and a spiritual body, 1 Cor.
15: 44. The latter is the body with which the saints shall be
endued in the resurrection. It will still be material, tbough it
be spiritual. The apostle's idea of spirituality was therefore
cons'istent with the idea of corporeity ; and by a spiritual bodj
he could only mean a body consisting of a subtil matter, which
is imperceptible by our senses as they are now constituted.

In the Scriptures angels always appear with bodies, and m
the human form ; and no intimation is anywhere given that
these bodies are not real, or are only assumed at the time, and
then laid aside. It was manifest, indeed, to the ancients, that
the matter of these bodies was not like that of their own, io^
much as angels could make themselves visible, and vanish agam
from their sight : but this experience would create no doubt of
the reality of their bodies : it would only suggest to them that
they were not composed of gross matter. Jesus, after hb ^esu^
rection, appeared often to his disciples, and vanished again be-
fore them ; yet they never doubted that they saw the same
body which had been crucified, though they must have pe^

• See Enfield's History of Philosophy^ B. ^ cbap. 13. sec. 1. Vol. I

1838.] Scr^^al Idea of jingdt. 37 3

ceived that it had undergone a very important change. I do
not mean that the fact, that angels always appeared in the ha-
man form, is a proof that they really have this form ; but that
the ancient Jews believed so. The instructions contained in
the Holy Scriptures are always necessarily adapted to the ac-
tual state of knowledge at the time, to the opinions which are
entertained, and the mode of thinking which prevails, among
the people to whom they are originally addressed ; for other*
wise they would not be understood. The critical student of
the Scriptures will distinguish between the substance and the
form of these instructions, and will expect to find in the latter,
only what the intellectual character of the people, and the state
of knowledge among them, and their prevailing opinions were.
Angels may have the human form ; but many other forms are
possible.

We read of angels eating and drinking. Gen. 18: 8. 19: 3.
But in Judges 13: 16, 16, when Manoah said to the angel, ^* I
pray thee, let us detain thee, until we shall have made ready a
kid for thee," the angel answered him, " Though thou detain
me, I will not eat of thy food.'' The manner in which the
Jews removed the apparent discrepancy, and the sense in which
they understood such places, appears from the apocryphal book
of Tobit, where the angel says to Tobit and his parents, " It
seems to you, indeed, as though I did eat and drink with you ;
but I use invisible food, which no man can see," Tobit 12: 19.
In Psalm 78: 25, the manna which fell from heaven is called
" angels' food." The author of the apocryphal book of Wis-
dom says, ''Thou didst nourish thy people with angels' food,
and didst send to them from heaven bread prepared without
labor which afforded every pleasure, and was suited to every
one's taste," Wisdom 16: 80. The parable of the rich man and
Lazarus, the form of which is adapted to the ancient mode of
thinking, represents the saints in raradise, with Abraham at
their head, enjoying themselves in the pleasures of a feast, Luke
16: 23 — ^25. Among the christian fathers, Justin Martyr and
Clement of Alexandria taught that angels ate a celestial food.*
The Gentiles ascribed aerial bodies to their gods, and believed
that they lived upon ambrosia and nectar. The Stoics thought
that the stars, which all classes ranked among the gods, were
nourished by exhalations from the seas and rivers. Daemons

* Muenscber's Dogmengeschicbte, Vol. II, sec. 1 16.

<874 Scriptural Idea of AngtU. [Oct.

were believed to feed upon the fumes of sacrifices* All tfaii
supposes that such beings were endued with bodies.

Origen, a father of the third century, applies the teim asomor
to$ aawfiatos, incorporecdy to angels. He uses the term, bow-
ever, in a twofold sense. Sometimes he means by it a purely
spiritual nature ; and thb he ascribes to the Deity alone, and
y not to any created beingv At other times he uses it to denote
a subtil, etherial body, in contra-distinction from a body oooast-
ing of gross earthy matter. In his opinion no created being
could be entirely incorporeal ; and hence be supposed angeb
to be endued with bodies of an etherial substance. This opin-
ion was entertained by many of the fathers.* It is allied to the
doctrine of the Platonic school of philosophy. Plato taught
that the supreme Deity is a pure spirit, and all other intelligent
beings are portions which have emanated from bis essence ; but
all these emanations are compounded with portions of matter.
He spoke also of the ochema oxnt^ot^ the material vehicle of the
aoul.f It is not improbable that God is the only pure spirit in exis-
tence : it is certain, at least, that no created spirit can be of the
same essence with him. Neither does it seem very improbable
that there are forms of matter with which the most exalted spirits
are compounded. When matter is considered abstracted from
its qualities, we can no more conceive what it is^ than we can
conceive what the substance of spirit is : and it would therefore
be presumptuous to say that the Creator may not have united
them throughout the intellectual universe.

When Jesus told the Sadducees that those who shall be ac-
counted worthy to obtain the resurrection fix)m the dead, wiU
neither marry nor be given in marriage, but shall be like the
angels, Luke SO: 35, 36, he taught by implication that angeb
have no distinction of sex.

The Scripture never makes mention of female angeb. The
Gentiles had their male and female divinities, that were the
parents of other gods. In the Scriptures the angeb are always
males. They are so represented, not to mark a distinction of
sex, but because the masculine b the more honorable gender.

Angels appear, in some instances, of prodigious stature and
great magnificence. Rev. 10: 1—^ ; in others as ordinary men,
Gen. 18:8. 19: 3; sometimes they are described as youthful^

* Moenscher's Dogmengescbichte. Vol. II. sec. 116.
I See Enfield'k Hiitory of Philosopby, Vol. I.

1838.] Scriptural Idea of Angeli. 37&

Mark 16: 5, but never exhibiting marks of age. The constant
absence of the features of age, indicates the continual freshness^
and vigor of immortality, and the recency of their origin in con-
tradistinction from the eternity of God, who alone is ever spoken
of as " the Ancient of days," Daniel 7: 9.

Angels are represented as constituting a celestial hierarchy.
The Bible speaks of cherubim, of seraphim, of seven angels
that stand before God, of an archangel, and of innumerable mul-
titudes of angels. In the New Testament, Jesus himself makes
no such distinctions ; unless Matthew 18: 10, be an excep-
tion ; but his apostles speak generally of " angels, and authori-
ties, and powers ;" and of " principality, and power, and might,
and dominion," in heaven, 1 Pet. 3: 22. Ephes. 1: 21.

Cherubim are not real beings, but mystic symbols, the mean-
ing of which it is not easy to ascertain. In Ezekiel 1: 10, they
are four in number. Each of them has four faces ; namely, the
face of a man, of a lion, of an ox, and of an eagle. They are
connected with four wheels, which, as well as the cherubim
themselves, are full of eyes ; and in moving all move together,
at the same time, and in the same direction. Above them is the
likeness of a throne ; and upon the throne, the glory of Jehovah*
In Revelation, ch. iv. the living creatures are also four ; they
are in and round about the throne, upon which Jehovah sits ;
there are four faces, but each of them has only one face ; the
first is like a lion, the second like an ox, the third has the face
of a man, and the fourth is like a flying eagle ; each of them
has six wings, and is full of eyes ; they act severally, but in
concert, and give glory, honor, and thanks to Him who sits upon
the throne. In the tabernacle, and in the temple, two cherubs
with expanded wings were placed upon the ark of the covenant.
Jehovah was conceived to be seated between the cherubs, and
to have the lid of the ark for his footstool. There he gave his
oracles and dispensed mercy ; wherefore the place was called
the mercy-seat.

After the expulsion of Adam from paradise, cherubs guarded
the tree of life. In the 18th Psalm, David celebrates his deliv-
erance from great distress, by a signal interposition of God,
which he describes as attended with earthquake, darkness and
tempest, and says, '^ And he rode upon a cherub, and did fly ;
yea, he did fly upon the wmgs of the wind.'' The latter mem-
ber of the parallelism explains the former : to ride and fly upon
a cheruby and to fly upon the wings of the wind| are the same

376 Scriptural Idea of Angels* [Oct.

thing. The windi the storm, is therefore one of the thiDp
which are symbolized by the cherubim ; and we may hazaid
the conjecture, that the cherubim are the symbol of nature,
operative in the various natural phenomena, in the earthquake,
the storm, the dark cloud, and the thunder ; but exhibitiog it-
self most noble in living creatures, of which man, as the kd of
the visible world, the ox, as the chief of domestic animals, the
lion, as the noblest of the beasts of the forest, and the eagle, as
the king of birds, are the representatives. The cherubim are
four in number, because, in the opinion of the ancients, aatuie
consists of four elements ; they have four faces, lookiag at the
same time to the four ends of heaven, to indicate the univeisd
presence of the same powers ; they act in concert to denote the
harmony of nature in its operations ; they are full of eyes, to
signify the perfect intelligence with which all those operatioDS
«re performed ; Jehovah is enthroned above the cherubini, or
in the midst of them, to represent his sovereignty over universal
nature ; and the four living creatures cease not, day nor nigbt,
to give glory, honor, and thanks to him that sitteth upon the
throne, because all nature bears testimony, unceasingly, to tbe
glorious attributes of Jehovah. If this idea of tbe cherubim be
correct, the cherub that guarded the way to the tree of life}
was some natural phenomenon, perhaps a volcanic eruption,
that terrified and kept in awe the first parents of our race, cod-
scious of transgression and guilt.

The seraphim are mentioned only once, in Isaiah 6: 2, 6.
The word occurs, indeed, in Numbers 21: 6, 8, and Deat.8:
15, where it means Jiery serpeniSj and in Isaiah 14: 29, and
^0: 6, where, in connection with the participle meophefk
^oi:^& , it signifies a flying serpent ; but in no other place does
it signify intelligent beings. Sarapk in Hebrew means to bum.
Cresenius derives seraphim from an Arabic word signifying to be
noble, to be superior ; according to which the sense o(serapUM
will be, nobles, magnates. In Isaiah's vision they stand above
the throne ; each of them has six wings ; with t^wain they cover
their faces, and with twain they cover their feet, and with twain
they fly. And one cries to another, " Holy, holy, holy is the
Lord of hosts : the whole earth is full of his glory." They
have much resemblance to the cherubim, and may, like tbem,
be symbolical beings. They may also be a distinct order of
beavenly intelligences.

The Seven Angels that stand before God are first mentioned

1 838.] Scriptural Idea of Angels. 377

ID the apocryphal book of Tobit, ch. 12: 15, where Raphael,
the guide of the younger Tohit in bis journey, is made to say,
'^ I am Raphael, one of the seven angels who stand before the
Lord/' Tbey are afterwards spoken of in the Revelation of
John, as the seven spirits which are before the throne of God,
1: 4; the seven spirits of God, 3: 1 ; the seven lamps of fire
burning before the throne, which are the seven spirits of God,
4: 5 ; the seven eyes upon the horns of the Lamb, which are
the seven spirits of God sent forth into all the earth, 5: 6 ; the
seven angels which stood before God, and to whom were given
seven trumpets, 8: 2. They are not elsewhere mentioned in
other books of the Bible. But Gabriel announces himself as an
angel who stands in the presence of God, Luke 1: 19; and Je-
sus speaks of angels which do always behold tlieface of his Fa-
ther which is in heaven. Matt. 18: 10. There is here an allu-
sion to the seven princes of Persia, whose privilege it was to
have unrestrained access to the king at all times. They are
described in the book of Esther, chap. 1: 14, as ^' the seven
princes of Persia and Media, who saw the Icing* sface^ and who
sat the first in the kingdom.^' This order of nobility was first
instituted in the reign of Darius Hystaspes. Zoroaster, the re-
former of the Magian religion, who lived in this reign, seems to
have taken from the political constitution of the kingdom the
idea of the seven Amshashpands, which he assigns to Ormusd,
as next to him, in the kingdom of light. Unless the mode of
expression in the texts of Luke and of Matthew, above referred
to, is a mere accommodation to a prevalent manner of thinking
and speaking among the Jews of that time, they authorize the
belief that there is a class of angels who, in a peculiar sense,
stand before God ; and it is then not the thing itself, but the
manner of expressing it that is borrowed from a foreign source.
Perhaps they may be the same as the seraphim, in the sense of
nobles, magnates.*

The title archangel occurs in the epistle of Jude, '' Yet Mi-
chael, the archangel, when contending with the devil, be dispu-
ted about the body of Moses, etc. ;" and in the first epistle of
Paul to the Thessalonians, ch. 4: 16. " For the Lord himself
shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the

* The number Mveh may be a definite for an indefinite number,
and the idea of seven such angels uiny be an accommodation to the
fact that the number of these Persian princes was seven.

Vol. XII. No. 32. 48

378 ScripturiU Idea ofAngtU. [Oct.

archangel, and with the trump of God : and the dead in Chiist
shall rise first." The same angel is named by other titles is
the prophecies of Daniel, ch. 10: 13> 26 and ch. 12: 1, wiiere
he is called '^ Michael, one of the chief princes," — ^" Hichad
your prince ;" that is, of the Jews, — and ^* Michael, the greit
prince, who standeth for the children of thy people." The
angelic princes, in Daniel, are angels who preside over paitico-
lar countries and nations. Of these Michael is there represent*
ed as one, and as the prince who presides over the people of
God. He appear^ again in the book of the Revelation of John,
as the chief of the angels who fight, in tliat symbolical waifriti
against the dragon and his angels, and cast them out of heaTeo,
Rev. 12: 7. The terms in which he is spoken of in the New
Testament, seem to designate him as the only one of his chsi*
Some commentators have considered him the same with Mes-
siah, but for no sufficient reason that I can perceive. Messiib
b mentioned in the same places of the New Testament by other
titles. Michael may be the chief of the seven angek who stand
before Grod. In that case the title archangel would be applici-
ble to all the seven, but in an emphatic sense to him. His
name, BiKchael, is compounded of three words, Mp<Jul'H
bK:;''» , i. e. Who is like God ? It is a challenge addressed to the
whole creation to find anywhere one who is equal to God;
and it implies that Michael, the most exalted amoiig the intelli-
gences of heaven, is not.

The terms Thrones, Dominions, Principalities, and Powen,
imply subordination of ranks. There must be subjects wbeie
there are thrones ; but here the Scripture leaves us in the daik,
and rebukes our curiosity by its silence. It has told us as much
as we need to know. It has informed us that there is diferatf
of grades in the world of spirits, and that the same law wbidi
the Creator has established in our own world, obtains also io
others, throughout his great empire. He is one God ; and be
is everywhere the same.

The number of the angels is described as being very giot.
Daniel saw, in his vision, thousands of thousands ministering to
the Ancient of days, and ten thousand times ten thousand stand-
ing before him, Dan. 7: 10. The epistle to the Hebrews speib
of an innumerable company of angels, Heb. 12: 22. And St
John in his Revelation '^ beheld and heard the voice of ntfoj
angek round about the throne, and the living creatures, and tba
elders ; and the number of them was ten thousand times tea

1838.] Sar^tual Idea of Angels. 379

thousand, and thousands of thousands/' Rev. 4: 11. These
numerical terms are used in the Scripture to express numbers
that exceed computation. There is good reason to believe that
angels are much more numerous than the whole race of roan,
wUch constitutes but one order and one species.

St. Paul dbtinguishes the whole intelligent creation into
things in heaven, things on earth, and things under the earth,
Philip. 2: 10. The same distinction is made in the book of Rev-
elation, ** And no one in heaven, nor in the earth, nor under
the earth, was able to open the book, nor to look thereon."
And in the same chapter, the whole animated creation is de-
scribed as ^^ Every creature which is in heaven, and in the
earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the sea," Rev. 5:
3, 13. The ancients conceived the universe to consist of three
grand divisions, each of which was supposed to be immeasura-
ble and boundless. In their opinion, the earth, which they con-
sidered an immense plain, terminating on all sides in a bound-
less ocean, occupied the middle : the region above it they called
heaven, and the region below it hell ; in the Hebrew sheol,
bim) ; answering to the Greek hades, ^drjg, and the Latin infer*
num. So David conceived of it, when he said, << Whither shall
I go from thy spirit ? or whither shall I flee from thy presence ?
If I ascend into heaven, thou art there ; if I make my bed in
bell, behold, thou art there ; if I take the wings of the morning,
and fly to the uttermost parts of the sea, even there shall thy
band lead me, and thy right hand hold me," Ps. 139: 8 — 10.
So also Zopharin Job, ^* Canst thou by searohing find out God ?
Canst thou find out the Almighty unto perfection ? It is as high
as heaven ; what canst thou do ? deeper than hell, what canst
thou know ? The measure thereof is longer than the earth,
and broader than the sea," Job 11:7— ^9. Heaven was be-
lieved to be the dwelling place of the Ek)him, Jehovah and his
angels ; the earth was the residence of mankind ; and sheol,
which they represented as dark, silent, and inactive, was held
to be the habitation of the dead.

The Gentiles assigned divinities to each of these regions ;
they had their celestial gods in heaven, their terrestrial gods on
earth, and their infernal cods in hades ; all of whom were ob-
jects of worship. The Holy Scripture acknowledges one only
God, whom it represents as present on earth, and in hades, and
filling immensity, while his appropriate dwelling is in heaven ;
and claims lor him exclusively all religious veneration. Though

880 Scriptural Idea ofAngds. [Oct.

angels, as well as Jebovab, are called elohimj whicb the Greek
version commonly renders theoiy gods, they are nowhere reoog*
nized as proper objects of worship ; they themselves disclaim
it ; the Scripture commands them, as well as the children of
meui to worship Jehovah ; and in the visions of heaven, which
were vouchsafed to the prophets, they all unite in the pro-
foundest adoration and praise to him who sits upon the throoe«
When Manoah requested an angel, saying, " I pray thee, let us
detain thee, until weshalt^tave made ready a kid for thee,"
the angel answered him, ** Though thou detain me, I will not
eat of thy bread ; and if thou wilt oSer a burnt offering, thoa
must offer it unto the Lord," Judges 13: 16. The Psalmist
exhorts the spirits of heaven, in the text we have before quoted,
" Worship him, all ye Ellobim ;" and again, in another place,
*^ Bless the Loixi, ye his angels, that excel in strength, that do
his commandments, hearkening unto the voice of hb word.
Bless ye the Lord, all ye his hosts, ye ministers of his, that do
his pleasure." And again, ^'Praise ye him, all his anis^els;
praise ye him, all his hosts," Ps. 97: 7. 103: 20, 21. 148: 2.
In Isaiah's vision, the seraphim, who are near the throne of
God, cover their faces and their feet with their wings, in token
of the profoundest and most awful veneration, and cry to one
another. Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord of Hosts ; the whole
earth is full of his glory." And the author of the book of
Revelation tells us, ** And every creature which is in heaven,
and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the
sea, heard I saying, Blessing, and honor, and glory, and power,
be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb
forever and ever," Isaiah 6: 2, 3. Rev. 5: 13. All this is io
obedience to that first commandment in the kingdom of Jeho-
vah, '^ I am the Lord thy God : thou shalt have no other gods
before me." How widely does all this differ from the Olympus
of the Greeks! It bears upon its face the evidence of a divine
origin, and rebukes into silence and shame the wisdom of this
world, that erred so egregiously in its searching after God.

According to the Holy Scriptures the Elohim live forever.
Gen. 3: 22; the angels shall never die, Luke 20: 36; but no
being besides Godhimself has essential immortality, lTim.6:
16. Every other being therefore is mortal in itself, and can be
immortal only by the will of God. Angels, consequently, are
not eternal, but have a beginning. In the ancient systems of
philosophy, which were based upon the theory of two eteroal

1838.] Scriptural Mm ofAngeli. 881

.principles, the active and the passive, God and matter, while
corporeal things were represented as formations out of original
matter, all spirits were conceived to be emanations from the
Deity, and portions of his essence. From this origin was
deduced their immortality. They were therefore conceived to
be necessarily immortal ; they might lose their individuality by
re&bsorption into the Deity, but their essence could never cease
to exist. This notion has not ceased to be entertained in our
own time ; we still have, in one of our most admired hymns,
the idea that the human soul is a '^ vital spark of heavenly
flame." This philosophy seems to be favoured by the text in
Genesis 2: 7, ^^ And the Lord God formed man of the dust of
the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life ;
and man became a living soul." {neppesh '^m animal) ; and the
place in Ekxlesiastes, chap. 12: 7, ^^ Then shall the dust return
to the earth as it was, and the spirit [ruach breath,) to God
who gave it." But these texts speak not of the soul, but of
the breath, which the ancients considered the principle of life,
and which God both gave and took away. The Scripture
never represents spirits as emanations from God, and portions of
himself, but as creatures, mere eflfects of bis creative power,
and his good pleasure. Hence it draws so broad a line of
distinction between him and them, strictly forbids to place them
beside him as gods, claims immortality for him alone, challenges
the universe to say what is like him, commands every knee to
bow to him, and declares that nothing shall glory in his presence.
Angels are enumerated among the creatures of God, where all
hb works are invoked to give him glory : " Praise ye him, all
bis angels ; praise ye him all his hosts. Praise ye him, sun
and moon ; praise him all ye stars of light. Praise him, ye
heaven of heitvens, and ye waters that be above the heavens.
Let them praise the name of Jehovah : for he commanded, and
they^were created. He hath also established them forever:
he hath made a decree, which shall not pass away," Ps. 148:
a— 6. Comp. Ps. 103: 20, 22.

Moses has not made mention of the creation of angels in bis
account of the origin of the world. After saying in general
terms that, in the beginning, God created the heavens and the
earth, he descends to particular details, describes first the con-
ditbnof the earth before it was reduced to form and replenished
with vegetation and animals, or was furnished with a canopy
over it, with luminous bodies .to enlighten it, to rule the day

389 Scnphurd Idea of AngtU. [Oct.

and to beautify the night ; and then relates the work of eich
successiFe day. He speaks of the creation of the light, of the
firmament, of the seas, and the dry land, of plants, of the
heavenly hodies, of animals that inhabit the waters, the air, and
the land, and lasdy describes the creation of man. In all this
there is no mention of an order of intelligent beings supeiiorto
man ; yet they were certainly not of less importance, nor a les$
illustrious manifestation of creative power, than all these tbiop.
Moses well knew the existence of angels ; for he often speab
of them in his subsequent history. His silence conoening
them, in this place, is therefore of easy explanation only oo the
supposition, that they do not belong to that creation of which
he designed to speak ; and consequentiy, that they existed
before. This supposition is supported by the texts in Job,
chap. 38: 7, and in Genesis, chap. 1: 26, 27, and chap. 3: 22,
which have already been considered. The design of Moses
was to give an account only of the origin of the visible woiU,
of which man is a component part. Nothing can therefore be
inferred from his cosmogony to show, either that creative power
was not exerted before this worid began, or that itis oo(
exerted still. The fourth commandment in the decalogue
seems, indeed, very plainly to refer the origin of all things to
the work of the six days : '^ In six days the Lord made the
heavens and the earth, and all that is in them." So also the
place Genesis 2: 1—3, " Thus the heavens and the eardi were
finished, and all the host of them. And on the seventh dif
God ended his work which he had made, and rested oo ibe
seventh day from all his work, which he had made. And God
blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it, because io it be
rested from all his work, which he had created and made."
But in both these places, and in all others, where the work of
the six days is spoken of, or alluded to, the creation which is
meant is the creation of the visible world, with which alooe
Moses is concerned ; and the universal terms, which are osed
in speaking of it, must therefore be understood as oomprebeod*
ing only all that belongs to this world.

When the Holy Scripture speaks of angels as the mtoisteis
of God, who are emploved to execute his will, it does not men
that he needs their aid, nor that he receives any fitxn theo.
Its language is, ^' The everlasting God, Jehovah, the Crestorot
the ends of the earth fainteth not, neither is weary ; theie isM>
searching of his understanding/' Isaiah 40: 28. It is not fcr

1888.] Scriptural Idea o/Afigtb. 388

his own sake, but for theirs, that angels are so employed. Ac-
tivity ID the pursuit of some interesting end is essential to the
happiness of all rational creatures. No living creature, indeed,
is as happy in a state of confinement as in possession of liberty,
until art and custom have subdued the original principles of its
nature : and even then it will still seek enjoyment in motion, as
far as its cage or its chain will permit. Man without employ-
ment is restless, and contrives various methods to rid himself of
the heaviness of vacant time ; he resorts to company, or to
books, or to play ; and if no other means be left, he will count
the spots upon the walls of a prison, or amuse himself by training
a spider. Angels could have no heaven, if they had no em-
ployment : it is thb that caib into activitv the faculties with
which Grod has endowed them ; and it is m this activity that
their felicitv is found. They are employed in executing the
will of God, and are therefore conscious of always acting right ;
or what is the same thing, of acting always in accordance with
the nature of God, and in harmony with the nature of things.
Mere activity is not itself the source of pure and enduring hap-
piness. The enjoyment which it afibrds is dbturbed and em-
bittered by the consciousness of acting contrary to the divine
will. The will of God is not a mere arbitrary volition, that is
superinduced upon the nature of things, and may be changed :
it is the law which emanates from the nature of God, and b de-
veloped and impressed upon all his works, by a moral necessity :
it is therefore immutable, omnipotent, and eternal. With thb
will the creature must accord, or not exist, or exist in misery*
The acts of free agents ' that are opposed to it, are to the har-^
mony of the universe what a disturbing cause is to the move-
ments of a great machinery ; and as nothing can prevail against
omnipotence, the result oi such opposition can only be the de-
struction of the being from which it comes. Angeb are em-
ployed in doing the divine will, that all their acting may be in
harmony with the nature of God and of his works : and that
the consciousness of this harmony may secure their complete
felicity.

The ultimate design of God with regard to all hb rational
creatures is their happiness ; and as the means to this end, their
holiness : or, what is the same thing, their conformity to his own
nature in their moral character. The spirits of heaven are al-
ways represented as equally holy and happy. Their chief eod
b to please God : they never appear to act with reference to

384 Scriptural Idea of Angels. [Oct.

themselves, or as having their own happiness in view as the ob*
ject of pursuit : God is to them the centre of attraction, to
which, in all their movements, their thoughts, and their amo-
tions turn. In the visions of heaven, which were granted to the
prophets, angels stand before the throne of Jehovah, in token
of their readiness to receive and execute his commands ; or
celebrate the excellency of his character, absorbed in the grett-
ness of their theme, and apparently unconscious of any odier
interest. But this very devotion ; this entire forgetfulness of
themselves, and absorbedness in reverence and lore toward
God, constitutes a moral union with him, and consummates
their happiness. Felicity and holiness are inseparable, except
in thought. When they are viewed apart, the former is the
chief end of God, and the latter must be the chief end of the
creature.

This absorbing attention of the spirits of heaven to Jeho?di
roust not be so understood, as to exclude a proper regard to his
works. It must be recollected that God is everywhere, and
his law is every where ; he is seen in the star ; be is maniiesteti
in the flower ; the worm declares his presence ; and the seiaph
cries to his fellow, ^' All the earth is full of his glory." &
pecialiy is God revealed in the person of Christ, in the work of
redemption, in the conflict of light and darkness, in the tiiab
and the victories of bis people, and in the just punishment of
the impenitent wicked. Angels, therefore, take an interest ia
our world, because God is in it ; and because it is a great
theatre upon which his glory is displayed ; that glory abo?ei]l
which is the most winning and kindling, the riches of his lo^
and grace. St. Paul says of angels, " Are they not all mim*-
tering spirits, sent forth to minister unto those who shall be
heire of salvation ?" Heb. 1: 14. And in Ephesians, " To ibc
intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heaYeol/
places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of
God," Ephes. 3: 10. St. Peter calls the suflferings of Christ,
and the glory which should follow, and the salvation of iallea
men by the ministrations of the gospel, " Things which the
angels desire to look into," 1 Pet. 1: 11,12. Jesus biwsdf
declares, " There is joy in the presence of the angels of God
over one sinner who repenteth," Luke 15: 10. Angels annooD-
ced the Saviour's birth ; and a multitude of the heavenly host,
when they had heard the message to the shepherds at Betbla-
hem, burst forth into a song of praise, giving glory to God n

1 838.] Scriptural Idea of Angeh. 365

the highest, and rejoicing in the prospect of peace on earth, and
of good will among men, Luke 2; 8^ — 14. They ministered to
Jesus during bis public life, were present in his temptations, in
his agony and death, in his resurrection, and at his ascension
into heaven, and watched with intentness the development of
the purpose of redemption in these singular events. The
apostles were cheered in their trials by the presence of angels.
Acts J2: 7 ; and the least among the people of God are repre-
sented as subjects of their attention and care in seasons of dan-
ger and distress. David says, " The angel of the Lord en-
campeth round about them that fear him, and delivereth
them." Ps. 34: 7. Jesus, speaking of the infant children of be-
lievers, says to his apostles, '< Take heed that ye despise not
one of these little ones ; for I say unto you, that in heaven
their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is
in heaven," Matt. 18: 10. And in the parable of the rich man
and Lazarus, the pious poor man, whom the world suffered to
perish in wretchedness, is borne of angels in his death, and
carried to Abraham's bosom, Luke 16: 22. In all this activity
the angel's mind is toward Jehovah, beholding his glory, and
proclaiming his praise ; he is, as it were, *' standing before the
throne."

It was a favorite opinion of the christian fathers, that each
individual is under the guidance of a particular angel who is as-
signed to him as a guardian. They spoke also of two angels,
the one good and the other evil, whom they conceived to be
attendant on each individual : the good angel suggesting good
thoughts, restraining from evil practices, and aiding in the pur-
suit of virtue ; the evil, angel, on the contrary, hindering every
good purpose, and endeavoring to seduce into the paths of sin.
The Jews, except the Sadducees, cherished the same belief.
Among the Gentiles the Greeks bad their tutelary daemon, and
the Romans their genius. The former spoke also of a good
and an evil daemon, who contended for the government of the
individual on whom they attended ; and the latter had their
good and their evil genius, who strove in the same manner for
the same object.

Of the doctrine of the christian fathers on this subject, the
following passao^e from the Shepherd of Hermas may serve as a
specimen. ^' There are two angels with man ; one of right-
eousness, the other of iniquity. And 1 said unto him, sir, how
shall I know that there are two such angels with man ? Hear,

Vol. XII. No. 32. 49

386 Scriptural Idea of Angels. [Ocr.

says be, aod understand. The angel of rigbteousness is intU,
and modest, and gentle, and quiet. Wben therefore he gets
into thy heart, immediately he talks with thee of righteoasness,
of modesty, of chastity, of bountifulness, of forgiveness, of cba^
ity, and of piety. When all these things come into thy heart,
know then that the angel of righteousness is with thee. Where-
fore hearken to this angel and to his works. Learn also the
works of the angel of iniquity. He is first of all bitter, and an-
gry, and foolish ; and his works are pernicious, and overthrow
the servants of God. When therefore these things come into
thy heart, thou shalt know by his works that this is the angel
of iniquity. And I said, sir, how shall 1 understand these
things ? Hear, says he, and understand. When anger over-
takes thee, or bitterness, know that he is in thee : as also when
the desire of many things, and of the best meats, and of drunk*
enness ; when the love of what belongs to others, pride aod
much speaking, ambition, and the like things come upon thee.
When therefore these things arise in thy heart, know that the
angel of iniquity is with thee. Seeing therefore thou koowest
his works, depart from them, and give no credit to him ; be-
cause his works are evil, and become not the servants of God.
Here therefore thou hast the works of both these angels. Un-
derstand now, and believe the angel of righteousness, because
his instruction is good. For let a man be never so happy, yet
if the thoughts of the other angel rise in his heart, that manor
woman must needs sin. But let a man or woman be never so
wicked, if the works of the angel of righteousness come into his
heart, that man or woman must needs do some good. Tlxw
seest therefore how it is good to follow the angel of righteous-
ness. If therefore thou shalt follow him, and submit to his
works, thou shalt live unto God. And as many as shall sub-
mit to his works, shall live also unto God."*

In the language of this father, then, we must attribute what-
ever a man does to his good or evil angel ; just as the ancient
Roman would have imputed it to his ^ood or evil genius.
There is nothing of this in the Bible. The places in Psilni
34: 7 and Matt. 18: 10, to which the fathers referred, certainly
have no such meaning. The former text, " The an^l of the
Lord encampeth round about them that fear him, and delirer-
eth them," does not speak of a single angel, nor of a single in-

* Hermat, B. II. Command 6.

1838.] Scriptural Idea ofAngeU. 887

dividaal, nor of a whole course of life. The singular, angel^ is
a collective noun ; for one angel could not be said to encamp
round about any thing. They that fear the Lord are all the
pious in general ; and the time or occasion referred to, is the
season of danger and distress. The meaning of the text, di-
vested of its poetic form, is simply this, that God employs the
ministry of angels to deliver his people from affliction and dan-
ger. The text in Matthew says, that the infant children of be-
lievers ; or, if you please, the least among the disciples of
Christ ; whom the ministers of the church might be inclined to
neglect on account of their supposed insigni6cance, are in such
estimation in heaven, that the angels who stand before God do
not esteem it below their dignity to minister to them ; it does
not mean that one of those angels is assigned to each of these
little ones ; for in that case, if the number of those angels be
seven, only seven such infants could be provided for. The idea
of a guardian angel, or of two contending angels, striving for
the control of an individual, is not derived from the Scriptures,
but from the fancies of the Jews ; or, rather, from those of
Gentiles : and it is one among the many proofs of the incompe-
tency of the fathers, even of the earliest among them, to serve
as guides in the in'terpretation of the Holy Scriptures. The
superstitions of the age, and the philosophy of the Grecian
schools, held too strong a hold of their minds, to be sufficiently
kept from mixing with the instructions of the sacred text, and
polluting its purer streams even where they issued from their
fountain.

The world of spirits is not, as many think, at a great distance
from us, in other regions of the universe : it is wherever the
material world is ; we are in the midst of it. We are separa-
ted from it only by the gross matter with which we are now
united ; and when we shall be divested of these bodies, we
shall be in another world, without being in another place. We
shall then perceive objects of which we can now have no per-
ception, because our senses are not adapted to them. The ma-
terial world also will be to us a wholly different thing from what
it is ; inasmuch as its impressions will be made upon wholly
different organs. It may be presumed, there will then be no
such ideas of extension, of solidity, of space, etc., as we now
have; nor shall we receive either pleasure or pain from the
same objects which produce them now. In a word> we shall
be as the angek of God, and the world will be to us what it

888 Scriptural Idea of Angeh. [Oct.

now b to tbem. The world of spirits, therefore, is not another
place, but another state of being. We are now in the presence
of God, and of Christ, and of angels ; and we shall see tbem is
soon as we shall have passed through our coming change. Of
this truth Jesus gave intimations to his disciples, when be ap-
peared to them, and disappeared, without locomotion, and knew
what they had spoken in his absence ; when he told tbem,
*^ Wherever two or three are gathered together in roy name,
there am 1 in the midst of them ;" and when he said, "Lo,l
am with you always, even to the end of the worid." What
the Scripture says about a heaven above us, and a sheol at
hades below us, is accommodated to our capacity and pre?ioiis
conceptions. When Jesus ascended into heaven, be did not
quit our world ; but he withdrew from our state of bein^ into
another, and adapted the manner of his withdrawing to the ooo-
ceptions and the mode of thinking of the mass of mankind.
Christ is with us still ; his angels are near us ; we are in the
immediate presence of God. If we sin, we cannot be hid; if
we do well, we are seen in so doing ; if we are in distress, or
in danger, our situation is observed, and our help is nigh at hand.
In the church on eanh we '' are come to an innumerable com-

Eny of angels, to the general assembly and church of the to
m, which are written in heaven, and to God the judge of all,
and to the spirits of just men made perfect, and to Jesus the
Mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinklio;
whwhspeaketh better things than that of Abel," Heb. 12:2^
24. "Wherefore, seeing we are compassed about by such
witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which dodi
so easily beset us, and let us run with patience the race tliatis
set before us, looking unto Jesus, the author and finisher of our
fiiith ; who, for the joy set before him, endured the cross, des*
pising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of tbe throne
of God," Heb. 12: 1, 2. The Father's house is the great uoi-
▼erse : our world is but one of its mansions : there are ocbeis
besides this one ; and all of them are inhabited by tbe inwaoft'
able family of Jehovah, the common Father of ail.

1838.] Mm Martinem's Works. 989

ARTICLE VI.

Review or Miss Maktineau's Works.

Society in America^ hy Harriet MartineaUy author of^*^ Ilhsirationt
of Political Economy.^^ In two volumes. New York and Lon*
don, 1887.

Retrospect of Western Travel^ hy Harriet Martineau^ author of
" Society tn America^^ " Illustrations of Political Economy y'* etc.
In two volumes, London and New York, 1838.

Some of our readers may wonder why we have not sooner
noticed this lady, who has made herself so conspicuous of late
years both in Great Britain and in this country ; and some may
wonder wliy we notice her at all. To this latter portion of
readers, we would say, by way of apology, that after going over
the 815 pages of her '^ Society," we had come to the conclusion
ef leaving her work to the praises and the censures of those
more immediately concerned. But she has since put forth these
other two volumes about America. And as this last work was
not premeditated by her, (as she tells us,) nor expected by any
body, neither we nor she can tell how many more we may yet
see. We have therefore thought it proper to be at the trouble
of giving such of our readers as have not perused the books,
some brief notice of their character, and more especially of their
moral and religious character. This is what more directly con-
cerns the mass of our readers, and what is the most likely to
exert either a good or a pernicious influence in our land. Some
recent transactions, too, in respect to the assertion of '' female
rights," seem to render a brief notice of the present champion
of these rights, both appropriate and timely. We say the pre-
sent champion, because Fanny Wright, like some others, when
becoming entangled in the bonds of wedlock, has ceased to lead
the van in this enterprise.

Miss Martineau has been called a Scotch lady, though she
occasionally speaks of herself, in company with others, as '^ we
English." And saving here and there a word of bad English
that she uses, and some severe censures on the fastidiousness
and insolence of English travellers in this country, (for which
w€ cannot blame her,) we have noticed nothing in these worka

890 Mia Martineai^s Works. [Oct.

to lead us to suspect her more northern birth. After acquiriiig
considerable celebrity as a writer of tales on political eoooooif ,
etc. she came to this country, a strong republican, and with the
expectation of seeing much to admire in this more free and nat-
ural state of society. And her readiness to admire and piaise,
b generally very conspicuous. Sometimes, indeed, she is de-
lighted with what last of all we should expect a delicate tod
tasteful female to admire. For instance, she is frequent io her
praises of the log cabins in the West, as being not only oom*
ibrtable but very '< neat." She praises also continually our tav-
ern-keepers, stage-coach drivers, waggon drivers, etc. especial)/
when they exhibit their manly independence and give free scope
to their mother wit — ^though perhaps at her own expense, id
all such matters, she rejoices in showing herself a perfect coo*
trast to her more fastidious brethren who have come over the
water to see us. If the coach breaks down, or the waggon fouo*
ders in the mud, it is rather an amusement than a vexation. If
the driver is stem, or a waiter is insolent, she knows how to pot
them in good humor. In all such things, we greatly adroirs
her good nature, and readily commend her example to all xnr
Tellers. In higher matters, too, she b often ready with her
ample commendation, though it seems sometimes more of a
studied and formal commendation, and not to spring quite so
unbidden from the heart. We have therefore no compbint to
make of her bad disposition towards us, though possibly sonie
of her English friends may censure her for occasionally praisiDK
us through malice towards them. Her prepossessions seem aD
in our favor ; and where she abuses us, as she does abuse as
most sadly in some respects, it is generally for things in which
we resemble, if not the whole christian world, at least the Brit-
ish nation. The only exceptions which now occur to our re*
collection, are those rather numerous passages in which she de-
cries us as destitute of all knowledge of philosophy, (by whidi
she means one knows not what,) and those other passages in
which she represents our climate as most deleterious to health,
and our slavery as the worst of all things.

Nor did she dispense her praises and her censures withoat
being at pains to learn something of the facts in question, h
this respect, she stands again as a signal contrast to many who
have just seen our shores, and then returned to report of t0
wonders equally astonbhing to the people on both sides of the
Atlantic. Sometimes, indeed, she tells a very stnnge sioi7*

1838.] Mm Martineat^i WorTci. 891

For iDStance, that while travelliDg near Saratoga Springs, *^ a
large white snake made a prodigious spring from the grass at
the driver, who jumped down and stoned it." But strange
stories, as to matters of fact, are not frequent in her pages.
And as to her diligence in seeing this new world, and hearing
what she could, (for she is too deaf to hear without an ear-
trumpet,) we presume she has rarely been surpassed by any
masculine wanderer. She traversed nearly our whole country,
and in almost every direction, and by every species of con-
veyance, from the steam-boat to the rudest waggon. In the
course of the two years she was here, she visited most of the
Slates and most of the important places and curiosities ; now
sailing on our rivers ; now, crossing our mountains ; now, off on
our western lakes ; now, in our halls of justice or of legislation ;
and now, among the Indian tribes. She consorted with all
kinds of people, and seemed well pleased and at home every
where — except among orthodox Christians. Of these, she
seems to have seen but few, and to have learned but little.
And of the few whom she did see, or deigns to notice, she
generally shows her sovereign contempt or her bitter hatred.
Dr. Beecber she hates the worst of all ; at whose house^she
very drily tells us she was entertained ; and whom, in another
place, she would most absurdly represent as the incendiary who
caused the burning of the Charlestown convent, because he
happened to preach against the Roman Catholics the Sabbath
before it was burnt — which preaching probabh' not one of the
incendiary inob attended or ever heard of. The catholics she
honors and defends, not so much because she loves them, as
because she bates those who most oppose their superstitions.
The exceptions to her general enmity to the orthodox, seem
chiefly confined to a few individuals who displayed the sove-
reign merit, with her, a zeal for anti-slavery movements. So
far as religion is concerned. Unitarians were her chosen com-
panions ; and she often reiterates the declaration, '* I am a
Unitarian." Still it was not religion in any form, nor religious
people of any stamp, that most engaged her attention. Civil
and political mattei-s and political men were her delight. Full
of zeal for acquiring knowledge of men and thinors like these,
and quite as zealous on her darling topics of anti-slavery, female
rights, and a freedom from all religious, and many moral
restraints, she traversed the length and breadth of our land,
putting herself on a level with the highest, and not scrupling to

399 MUs MarHneau's Jfark$. [Oct.

mingle ramiliarly with the lowest. '^ I visited/' says she, '' al-
most every kind of institution — prisons — insane aod other
hospitals — literary and scientific institutions ; the plantatioos rf
the south ; the factories of the north ; and the farms of the
west. I lived in houses which might be called palaces, io log-
houses, and in a farm house. I saw weddings and cbristeoings.
I was present at orations, at land sales, and in the slave maiiet.
I \^'as in frequent attendance on the supreme court aod in the
senate. Above all, I was received into the bosom of maoy
families, not as a stranger, but as a daughter or sister. I wis
acquainted with almost every eminent senator and represeota-
tive, — and was on intimate terms with some of the judges of
the supreme court. I enjoyed the hospitality of the Fresidcot
and several of the heads of departments. It would benearif
impossible to relate whom I knew, during ray travels. Nearly
every eminent man in politics, science, and literature, and al-
most every distinguished woman, could grace my list. I trav-
elled among several tribes of Indians, and spent months in the
southern States, with negroes ever at my heels.''

Truly, she must have been diligent for those two yeais!
And as she saw every body and every thing, aod as she ito
knows every thing, so she has undertaken to treat of ererj
thing. Not only does she tell her countrymen of all she saw
and thought while here, both respecting us and thero, but she
tells us of all we ought to be and to have here. Her 6rst work tf
not at all in the common shape of travels. Generally it followi
neither the course of her routes nor the order of time; butis
divided into paris^ chapters, and seciions^ according to the na-
ture of the weighty matters which her philosophic and masco-
line genius saw fit to discuss.

When treating on civil and political institutions, her remarb
are often good, though frequently betraying a propensity to w
extravagant and speculative, rather than a practical system of
government. She too much resembles the theorists of ibe M
French revolution, always ready to utter the cry of liberty aw
equality. While she heartily commends the degree of republi-
canism to which we have already attained, she tliinks we shall
be far in the rear of perfection so long as negroes and wofljen
are debarred from a seat in Congress and from the presideotiu
chair.

But it is when treating of distinguished men, and especiaVy^
polUiad ckaracterSf that her genius blaxes forth in its streog^

18380 ^Sfw' Martineau's Workt. 893

efiulgence. Here she is truly at home, and as one among her
peers. Nor can we much wonder, after reading what she has
said, often with so much justness as well as power, about indi-
vidual statesmen, fudges, presidents, and generals, that such a
woman should be deeply afflicted at finding what she regards as
a very paltry distinction between her and her brethren, the dis-
tinction of sex, placed as an insuperable barrier to her ever
thundering in the senate or giving destiny to empires. Here
we think is the one commanding trait in her character, and the
real clue to all she has so strenuously and so strangely urged in
favor of what she regards as '^ the rights of woman." Had she
been born a man, or had she early assumed the virile garb, as a
few of the female brethren on the page of history have done,
we should have heard nothing from her on iuch " rights." One
of the early Platonizing fathers, full of his aerial visions, main-
tained the doctrine, that each human soul forms its own body
to its own liking. Such a theory could not live an hour in our
day. A single personage of this caste, would suffice as a living
demonstration oi its falseness. For never would such a spirit
have chosen the female form for its habitation !

And now, as we have insensibly come upon the topic, dis*
missing all else which she has so manfully said on politics, men,
agriculture, manufuctures, commerce, and a vast variety of other
things, i^t us turn, for a while, to her section on the <' Political
Non-existence of Women." This is the seventh and closing
section of a long chapter which she denominates the '' Morals of
Politics." And truly it seems a very appropriate ending of the
climax to much of the political morality she had been teaching.
But the reader must here have a chance to judge for himself
respecting this portion of her political morality. As we would
neither distort her statements, nor maim this champion's argu-
ments, we will quote the essential parts of both.

The corollaries which ever and anon she bolts forth upon us
as the inevitable conclusions from her premises, are as fearful in
their import as they are startling in their aspect. She thus be-
gins this notable section on the '^ Political Non-existence of
Women:'

*^ One of the fundamental principles announced in the Declaratioa
of Independence is, that governments derive their just powers from
the consent of the ffoverned. How can the political condition of
women be reconcileo with this ?

^* Grove mments in the United States have power to tax women who

Vol. XII. No. 32. 60

394 •Miss Martinem's Works. [Oct.

hold property ; to divorce them from their husbands ; to fine, im-
prison, and execute them for certain ofTences. Whence do tbeie
governments derive their powers? They are not ^just^^as tbey
are not derived from the consent of the women thus goveined."<—
Society^ Vol. i. p. 148.

'^ The democratic principle condemns all this as wrong ; and re-
quires the equal political representation of all rational beingii
Children, idiots, and criminals, during the season of sequestntioo,
are the only fair exceptions.

'^ The case is so plain that I might close it here ; but it is inter
esting to inquire how so obvious a decision has been so evaded asio
leave to women no political rights whatever. The question hat
been asked, from time to time, in more countries than ooe, bov
obedience to the laws can be required of women, when no womB
has, either actually or virtually, given any assent to any law. No
plausible answer has, as far as I can discover, been offered ; for the
good reason, that no plausible answer can be devised. Tbe ttxA
principled democratic writers on government have on this subject
sunk into fallacies, as disgraceful as any advocate of despotism has
adduced. In fact, they have thus sunk from being, for the moffieol,
advocates of despotism. Jefferson in America, and James Mill at
home, subside, for the ^casion, to the level of the author of the
Emperor of Hussia's Catechism for the young Poles.'' — Ibid, p. 149.

She then goes on to quote Mr. Jefferson's reasons for exclud-
ing women from the political deliberations of our govemraeDt,
even if it were " a pure democracy in which all the inhabitants
should meet together to transact their business," viz., " to prt-
vent the depravation of morals and the ambiguity of issue." To
this, she replies: — "Woman's lack of will and of property is
more like the true cause of her exclusion from the representa-
tion, than that which is set down against her. As if (bere
could be no means of conducting public affairs but by promiscu-
ous meetings ! As if there would be more danger in promiscu-
ous meetings for political business than in such meetings fcr
worship, for oratory, for music, for dramatic entertainments,^
for any of the thousand transactions of civilized life! Tbe plei
is not worth another word."

The steps by which she hastens from the house of Gadto
the theatre, are indeed very nimbly taken. She bounds with
a light heart and an uoquaking conscience. And truly V (b^
temple of Jehovah and chat of Belial, are alike safe to feotle
purity and congenial to female modesty, we perhaps oti|^ ^
to deny that the town house and the halls of legislation and the
camp will be equally safe ! We presume Miss Martineaa w**

1838.] Misi Martineau's Works. 395

never sensibh of any injury by being present as a spectator in
such places. But to go on with her plea.

To the common and sound arguments, that women are
virtually represented by the men, since their interests are
identical with those of their husbands, brothers, fathers,
and sons, she replies : '^ The true democratic principle is, that
no person's interests can be, or can be ascertained to be, iden-
tical with those of any other person. This allows the exclu-
sion of none but incapables." And again, she just adds : " The
interests of women who have fathers and husbands, can never
be identical with theirs, while there is a necessity for laws to
protect women against their husbands and fathers. This state-
ment is not worth another word." Thus it is that she settles
that important point ; and then passes to the alleged incom-
patibility of political duties with the other duties of women.
On this she claims, that '< women are the best judges." And
then to the fact that even the women have virtually decided
that such duties are incompatible, by their ready and universal
acquiescence, she affirms that ^' such acquiescence proves noth-
ing but the degradation of the injured party." But she must
here speak for herself.

^'It is pleaded that half of the Human race does acquiesce in the
decision of the other half, as to their rights and duties. And in some
instances, not only of submission, but of acquiescence, there are.
Forty years ago, the women of New Jersey went to the poll, and
voted, at state elections. The general term, ^^ inhabitants,'^ stood
unqualified ; — as it will again, when the true democratic principle
comes to be fully understood. A motion was made to correct the
inadvertence ; and it was done, as a matter of course ; without any
appeal, as far as I could learn, from the persons about to be injuredf.
Such acquiescence proves nothing but the degradation of the injured
party. It inspires the same emotions of pity as the supplication of
the freed slave who kneels to his master to restore him to slavery,
that he may have his animal wants supplied, without being troubled
with human rights and duties. Acquiescence like this is an argu*
ment which cuts the wrong way for those who use it.'' — ^pp.l51, 152.

But, really, we fear these tyrannic lords of creation will not
feel the keen edge of this argument cutting back on themselves
quite so fatally as the kind lady thinks they ought to feel it.
We fear they will continue stupidly to say, (if they say any-
thing more about it,) that these good women of New Jersey,
when they had for a while enjoyed all this golden freedom and

898 Miss MariinecnCs Works. [Oct.

husbands. Aod as the strongest illustrations of this command
are found in the Old Testament, perhaps we have here one
reason why Miss Martineau iiolds that inspired portion of the
ancient records in such contempt as to think it a scandal that
a verse of it should be inscribed on the tombstone of so en-
lightened a man as Dr. Priestley.

But neither is this all. Two other large classes are absolved
by her doctrine from all legal control. The slaves in all the
States, together with the free blacks in most of tbe States,
constitute one of these classes. They have no voice in making
laws, and of course are no more bound to keep tbem than are
women. Nor was this bearing of her doctrine hidden from her
view, as is amply manifest from her whole strain. But this,
we fear our southern bretiiren will say, is preaching the doctrine
of slave insurrection, and that in no qualified way. Nay, thej
will regard it as a thousand times worse. For what is a re-
volt, with its consequent temporary calamities, compared with
every negro, bond and free, being left to follow his ^^owo
judgment and will," unbridled, and forever, and in all things?
unless the whites see fit to put the whole power of tbe State
into the hands of such a majority of voters. This, we say, we
fear the southern people, (who so hospitably entertained Miss
Martineau with their ^^ negroes ever at her heels,") will be
perverse enough to assert. And if asserted, we see not how
she, and the people at the north who side with her, can defend
themselves against the frequent charge of incendiary publica-
tions. Much sooner should we undertake to defend the right
of a general insurrection where success and subsequent order
could be hoped, than this wholesale principle of absolute
licentiousness.

But there is another class every where found, who, for a
much stronger reason, should be absolved, viz. voters who
actually oppose the laws that are framed and oppose tbe men
who frame them. How can such be bound by laws which, so
far from '' assenting to," they actually oppose ? We shall have
anarchy enough, surely, when this upas has spread its branches
over the land ! Nor will the coveted universality of suffrage, if
gained, remedy the evil. Tbe man who intends to be a vil-
lain, has only to show his timely opposition to laws which be
does not wish to keep, (though he may be glad to have the
makers hound by them,) and he is forever a^lved. Would
even Miss Martineau like to be thus exposed to the lawkss

1838.] Mist Martineau's Works. 399

part of our community while travelling among us ? Or would
she chink one who should will and judge it best to rob her,
quite fairly absolved, on his declaring he had not assented to
our laws ?

It is our own humble opinion, that Miss Martineau and some
others are in a serious mistake as to the foundation of our
government, and of all government ; and that, while God and
reason have left every nation to choose and to alter their forms
of government at pleasure, botii God and reason bind all to be
*' subject to the powers that be," and to obey all their righteous
laws, though they have had no hand in making the laws.

But possibly we have been a little too charitable towards the
fair sex, as found in Christendom, in supposing so large a portion
of them blush at the sight of such a section as the one we are
now upon. For Miss M. tells us, with overaweing emphasis,
respecting this doctrine, *' 1 know that there are women in Eng-
land who agree with me in this — I know that there are women
in America who agree with me in this." Who they are in En-
gland, we may not soon learn. But who some of those are in
America, we are perhaps in a sufficiently fair way of learning
in the course of public transactions on female rights, even if Miss
M. should not think it best to name them in her next work.
But we are determined still to enjoy the pleasure of our charita-
ble judgment of the sex, till we see more indications of the pre-
valence of such doctrine among them, notwithstanding her strong
assurance as to the portentous matter of fact in regard to some
of them, and her declaration that ^' it is the true democratic prin-
ciple which can never be seriously controverted, and only for a
short time evaded."

Were we now seriously apprehensive that such a time is at
hand, or that any portion of our women, (except a few posses-
sed by monomania for a season,) could desire it, we would ar-
gue with them on the absurdity of supposing, that in such aland
of christian civilization, the men can ever possibly imagine, that
they have any separate interests to maintain in opposition to
the women. And if they could themselves imagine the men to
have any such interest, or any disposition to assert it, we would
ask them whether the weaker sex will stand much chance of
success in attempting, in Miss Martineau^ s way, to gain their
proper sway among the tyrannic lords, already so entrenched
in power. But our discreet women would deem their under-
standings insulted, were we to enter seriously on any such argu-
ments.

400 Miii Martineat^s Works, [Oct.

We would just add here, that it is not merely io thbctmpler,
but everywhere in her books, that she speal^ of our women
with mingled pity and contempt, as poor, enslaved beings, suok
in ignorance of ahnost every thing but a debasing and super*
stitious kind of religion, bereft of their rights, and with ^' tlieir
morals crushed.'' This last phrase she reiterates again and
again. Since writing the last sentence, we have turned \o the
book, to see if our expression is not too strong ; and opeoiDgto
her chapter on women, we find the phrase no Jess than foar
times on the first eight pages, and always left with a dubioos
sense. And again and again does she reiterate, in the same
•chapter, that *' marriage is the only thing left open to womeD,"
and for this, they are but miserably fitted — to sustain its l)u^
-dens, and be companions to the men. But we must give aa
entire sentence or two, in order to show that our represeDtation
is not too strong. Our eye has just glanced on another pas-
sage containing some of her favorite expressions about both our
men and our women. ^' Men are ungentle, tyrannical. The;
abuse the right of the strongest, however tiiey may veil the
abuse with indulgence. They want the magnaniniiij to
discern woman's human rights ; and they crush her mcrab
rather than allow them. Women are, as might be anticipated,
weak, ignorant, and subservient." And on the same page, she
■adds:

" If it were not for the external prosperity of the country, the in-
jured half of its society would probably obtain justice sooner than ia
any country of Europe. But the prosperity of America b a ci^
cumstance unfavorable to its women. It will be long before diej
are put to the proof as to what they are capable of thinkiogaoil
doing : a proof to which hundreds, perhaps thousands of Engijsli-
women have been put by adversity, and the result of which bi
remarkable improvement in their social condition, even within (be
space of ten years. Persecution for opinion, punishroeot foraU
manifestations of intellectual and moral strength, are still as oom*
mon as women who have opinions and who manifest strength : ^
some things are easy, and many are possible of acliieveinept,ti)
women of ordinary powers, which it would have required genius D
accomplish but a few years ago.^' — ^Vol. ii. pp. 23&, 236.

The women, then, must pray for a curse on the land, if they
would hope most speedily to surmount such tyranny, offtf
this would help them, we cannot conceive, as we bad supp<»w
the tendency of prosperity, in a community like ours, pwo"

1888.] Mi$s Mariinem's WwTc$. 40.1

liarly favorable in relieviog the burdens and promoting the
education, the comfort, and the dignity of females. Nor do we
know precisely the kind of adversity which has come down so
propitiously on '' thousands of English women ;" unless it be
something which has sent an uneommon number of them into the
fields to toil, amid dust and heat, by the side of their hushands,
for daily bread. And this, on the whole, we suppose to be the
true interpretation, because Miss Martineau elsewhere informs
us, that siie has no objection to their joining in such toils ; and
because this course, where it did not prostrate the delicate
frame, would foster the manly energy which she so much
desires in the heroines she would train up for the coming crisis,
and likewise for the highest state of human perfectibility 1 This
would increase the small number of <f such brave women'' as
she informs us, in this same paragraph, '^ there are in the United
States, scattered among the multitudes."

With this brief and incidental notice of the absurd mingling
of men and women in the same employments, we were just
going to dismiss the unwelcome topic. But, on second thought^
we are persuaded we should thus be guilty of taking but too
slight a notice of what appears really to form one of the funda-
mental changes contemplated by Miss Martineau and her
coadjutors. She and others complain loudly of the artificial
distinctions between the sexes in their employments, not only
in regard to political offices, but in the common affairs of life.
And she admires the state of things among the pioneers of the
west, in their log cabins, as an approach towards the coming
perfection. Perhaps, too, she has contemplated with delight
the picture of rustic simplicity as it existed in Europe in the
early and middle ages, when women were allowed to take care of
themselves. And as she is peculiarly fond of the French
fi'eedom in philosophy, in morals, and in religion, we presume
she has thought of the freedom of occupation her sex still enjoy
in some departments of that fair land — perhaps the land of her
forefathers. We shall therefore be pardoned, if not praised, for
extracting some description of this "liberty and equality"
among the sexes, as it reigns there. The picture is drawn by
M. Airae Martin, in a recent work on " the Education of
Mothers," quoted in the New York Observer, of May last.
The author may not indeed agree with Miss Martineau as to
the moral bearing of the picture, but being on the spot, he has
at least had the best opportunities for a correct delineation.

Vol. XIL No. 82. il

V;
i

40S itfot lUartineau's Works. [Oct.

^* The great mv^ortune of our villaffes is the degnidatioQ of woowd
hy the la£>rs which belong to men. — ^In (heir early infancy they drite
the flocks, and gather the harvest. While youn^ girls, an instioct of
coquetry and the foresight <^ their mothers banishes them from the
ruder fatigues of agriculture ; but as soon as they are married, every
thing is changed ; they abandon the house and follow their husbands
imo the fields. You see them bent to the earth like machinery, or
loaded with enormous burdens like beasts. There are countries is
France, I do not mean Africa, where they are tackled to the dIoo^
like Ihe ox and the ass. Then their skin becomes wrinkled, tfa&
features become masculine, and they fall into a premature decrepitodc,
more hideous than that of old age. But while they are perfonn'iM
the labor of the men, the labors of the woman — those labors whicfl
soften all others — remain unknown or neglected. Nothing can be
more dirty, more unhealthy, than the interior of a cottage. — Ota
hens, ducks and hcw^s dispuie the possession of its damp soil. The door
opens into the mud, and the windows, when there are any* open up>
on the dung heap. Here it is, however, in a mud hole, like the hut
of a savage, in the midst of the ffTunting of animals and their ofien-
sive exhalations, that every evening, two human beings, a male and
female, come to rest themselves fl-om their fati^es. There no one
welcomes them, nothing agreeable meets their eye, the taWe »
empty and the hearth is cold. And here too, other labors await ^
woman, and before thinking of her husband^ supper, and the eaie
of her children, she must take care of the stable and give food to the
beasts.

*^ If we are asked for examples, we will cite whole proYinces, the
richest as well as the poorest of France. Perigord, where the wo-
men grovel in a state of dirt and degradation, which reacts upon the
whole family — Picardy and Limousin, where, repulsed to the h*
point, as an inferior race, they serve their husbands at the table,
without ever placing themselves by their side — ^Brisse, where they
are machines, beasts of burden and labor — ^Basse, and BiitagD^
finally, where the men, women, and children, reduced to an alooit
nva^ state, live, pell mell, in the same mud, eat the same black
com m the same manger, with their sheep and swine. Eveiyvhem
the degradation of the woman is the proot of the brutality d the mao,
and everywhere the biutalization of the man is the reaction of the
degradation of the woman. Do not ofler them comfort, tbejr will re-
pulse it as a strange or useless thing. To desire comfort it is nece»
sary to underetand it, and ages have passed over their cabins, with-
out leaving there any thoughts but those of labor and miseiy*

Of the condition and character of the man, where these i»
tions prevail, Mr. Martin informs us :

^ He 18 ignorant of comfort, the charm of caresBas, and evw^
power of love. His children tremble before bin>— his wift diei^

1888.] jMtf# Martineai^s WorTc$. 408

the vigor of his arm. The adversary « and not the protector of these
feeble beings, he knows no law but force. The last reason of the
peasant in his cabin, as well as in the fields, is the weight. of
nis fists.**

Is this a picture of paradbe ? we may humbly ask of Miss
M., or is it drawn from some portion of Pandemonium ! Nor
ought such a com passer of sea and land to ^' catch the manners
living as they rise," to object to any picture taken from real
life. She may say, (provided she does not indeed quite like the
whole of this delineation), that according to her '^ philosophy,''
things ought not to be just so. But will she say that they are
not 80 1 and that they unll not be so everywhere, and always,
when, like these French people, the men turn cooks with the
women, and the women turn farmers with the men ? Or will
her philosophy prevent the evil ? and change '' the ridiculous
into the sublime," as she somewhere bints ? and make all a
paradise ? But have not the French themselves already had
enough of precisely this same philosophy of equal rights, and no
restraints and no religion ? and that on no small scale ? Was
their enthronement of a woman as the goddess of reason, nothing
to the purpose in such an actual experiment ?

But let us now hear a word further from this sobered but
powerful French writer, as to the remedy he would propose.
After speaking of the better education of females, he says ;—

*^ The second means, the necessary consequence of the first, con-
sists in restoring to the peasant women the occupations of their sex,
in returning to the laws of nature. This simple change is a com-
plete revolution. In returning to her own labors, the woman recov-
ers her beauty, she regains her power. Occupied with things less
gross, her tastes are purified, her manners are softened, she seeks
neatness, she understands comfort, and the day is at hand when all
her thoughts all her desires reach the heart of her husband. The
delicacy of the woman is the most powerful enemy of the barbarity
of the man."

This remedy, so simple in its nature and so powerfully pre-
sented in this brief paragraph of Mr. Martin, Miss Martineau
may, indeed, declare to be the very disease itself. Still we
think it will be very difiicult for her or for any of our wander-
ing female lecturers on this subject, to meet the facts and their
legitimate conclusions. The whole progress of christian civilir
zation has been a gradual and steady advance in relieving wo-
ronn from the rude and heavy burdens which man's frame alone

404 MUt Martineau'i Works. [Oct.

is adequate to bear. The very structure of the delicate female
body, points to such a division of labors. And the structure of
tb^ more delicate mind, with its exquisite sensibilities, doubly
demands the same. Destroy these sensibilities, (as destroy them
you will by sending her to herd with men abroad in the care of
brutes), and you make her a brute. She may, indeed, becoine
a lioness ; but she is no longer a woman. With these sensbili-
ties destroyed, or even greatly perverted, woman sinks fer be-
low what man is capable of reaching in debasement. Heooe
not only the fish*women of Billingsgate, but female authors, loo,
are found to do and to say things which pot the whole world of
men in amazement. God likewise has ordained a separate
sphere for women. He forbade the two sexes to wear tbe
same dress. And so far as the divine ordinance has been fol-
lowed, it has been uniformly well for both woman and man. But
the present plan is, to reverse the whole process which God has
commanded, and which the whole progress of christian civilica-
tion has shown to be benign.

And why is /all this reversal enjoined upon us, at this late
day ? Because, says Miss M., men are still tyrants. To tbb
Mr. Martin, and all history, reply, the men would be ten Ibid
more tyrannical, should society take this retrograde step. ' Noth-
ing but the heft of fists, could then decide questions on female
rights.' And Miss Martineau seems almost to admit the plea,
when she urges this course in order to raise up ^' brave women"
who can vindicate their rights !

VBut no,' says this brave woman ; ' the merits of the case
are not touched. Nor does the whole volume of history afibrd
a single lesson on the main remedy proposed. Women are to
be trained to bravery and hardibooid, not for the purpose of
meeting men with their fists, but for meeting them at the polk,
and on the floor of Congress. They must fight their way to an
equality of civil and political rights. And when once admitted
to such equality, they will no longer suflTer from the tyranny of
the men. This remedy has never yet been tried ; but the'de-
mocracy of America is soon to be so purified, as to present tbe
sovereign and eternal cure.'

Right glad shall we be to hail so illustrious a nnorning ! Tbe
women, we readily and mournfully confess, have often and griev-
ously sufiered from the individual violence of the stronger men,
and likewise fiom the general customs prevalent among ndr
and especially unchristian nations; And if to spread die rigte

%

1888.] Miss MartifiMu's Works. 406

of a strictljT universal suffrage, is to cure all this evil, we con-
fess it will be a grand consummation,— -however it may shake
our faith in the Bible as a book of wise ordinances ! The wo-
men, in the mean time, we must take it for granted, will not
abuse the men, however high their political ascendant.

But may we here be permitted just to inquire, in a single
word, whether the omnipotence of this remedy is quite so ab*
solutely certain as Xo make it wise for us, without any further
thought, at once to overturn the whole structure of civilized so-
ciety ? occupation ? laws ? government ? all ? Surely, in a
momentous case, and where we have not the lights of history to
guide us, we may be suffered to pause for at least a second
thought, as to the soundness of those abstract principles on
which so much is to be hazarded* We will stop the chariot of
so glorious a reform, no longer than just to put a single question
or two. Suppose then universal suffrage, (the grand catlioli-
con,) is obtained ; and that a two-6sted Irishman and his brave
wife both go to the polls. Is it quite so certain that when they
return, (half drunk, perhaps, for Miss M. is not zealous for tem-

?erance reforms,) this Irishman will not abuse his wife at all ?
Ve confess we do not exactly see the foundation of this cenain-
ty. No more laws for the protection of wives are to be made
by the women, for these laws are now as strong as they can be;
and if not, the men are ready to make them stronger. How
then is the end to be promoted by the means ? — And still just
one more question. If the good women of New Jersey actual-
ly found their husbands becoming so much more kind, (for here
is a little light of history, after all, on the point,) how came they
so tamely to resign their franchise ? If they were thus actually
getting free from the original curse, " he shall rule over thee,*^
why have they not at least let the world know it, for the bene-
Gt of some future and braver women who may grasp their rights
with a firmer nerve ? [f this had been done, or if even the ab-
stract theory itself were more unquestionable, we confess we
should not be so much surprised as we now are at the female
authors and lecturers of our day, on this general subject. Nor
should we be quite so much surprised at the acquiescence and
cooperation of some chivalrous philanthropists, now conspicuous
before the public. We could even look with less of religious
amazement at the virtual repeal of a divine ordinance, touching
the matrimonial obligation in his own case, said to have been
recently made by a Rev. gentleman when in the solemn act of

406 MUi Martineau's Works. [Oct.

espousing an enlightened wife ! Could a mioister of the gospel
be afraid he should abuse such a wife ? Or did be fear he
could not enforce the required subjection ? Or did be think her
so superangelic as not to need God's law ? Or did be do tl»i
and has it been published through the land, as an example lo
other men who cannot be trusted with so high a prerogatives
that of ruling their own household ! Be all this as it may, we-
cannot but think it a pretty bold, (not to say anti-bible,) act,b
a minister of the gospel. We have always supposed it a part
of our christian duty, when officially solemnizing the bands of
marriage, to propound the mutual promise to the parties "to
conduct themselves towards each other in this sacred relatioo,
in all respects as God in his holy word requires." Ifiotemipi-
ed in the ceremony with such an exception to God's requiie-
ments, we see not how we could in conscience have proceeded;
and especially so in the case of a bishop, whom God has ex-
pressly commanded to '* rule his own house." Did we not re-
gard so radical an innovation in the matter of marriage soleroiu-
ties, as a very serious afiair in principle, (whatever may prove
to be the practical results to these individuals,) we should bf
no means have suffered our pen to digress upon so uDwelooDe
a theme.

But it is now high time to proceed to other topics io Hi«
Martineau's prolific books. And to what topic, in this coooec-
tion, can we more naturally turn, than to some brief ioquiiy is
to the new laws which the newly elevated legislators will ba«
to propose for the relief of themselves, or the beneOt of their
brethren ? Miss M. has not indeed seen fit to give us the oat-
line of any very extended code of reform laws. She has, how-
ever, most unequivocally shown us what one of the fii^ W"
leading enactments must be, provided her political morality is
to be the guide. And here, the gentle reader will again pleise
to brace his nerves. " It is clear," she says, in her sectioo oo
Marriage, ^' that the sole business which legislation has witb
marriage, is with the arrangement of property ; to guard the re-
ciprocal rights of the children of the marriage and the oomflW"
nity ;" and she thinks it ought to be here and in England, 9Si
is in Zurich, where, she says, " the parties are married bj »
form ; and have liberty to divorce themseh^es, without any "^
peal to law, on showing that they have legally provided for toe
children of the marriage." We can assure our readers tW
there is here no mistake as to the fiiir presentation of her vi^^

1888.] Mm Martinem^i Works, 407

on the perfect freedom of divorce. We eould quote the whole
section, if needful, to show that she would have every man left
by the laws to " put away his wife for any cause" he pleases,
and at any day ; and so of the wife with her husband. And
this is one of the grand things which she sees fit most distinctly
to specify, by which a millennium is to be produced in the con-
nubial relation, and in all that depends on this relation in fami-
lies and nations ! Verily it toas needless for her to go a single
step further in showing what reforms she would have in legist
lation. And why need we go any further, and attempt to show
from what she has elsewhere said, the nature of the other re-
forms we might expect, should her notions of liberty and equal-
ity gain the ascendency she so confidently predicts as at hand.
However roundly she may assert that there are women in
America and England that think with her, we can never be-
lieve till we witness the fact, that she can bring forward any
sane woman in this country who is not utterly abandoned in
morals, that would not shudder at the thought of such legal
licentiousness ! How far it may be wise for any of them to
follow such a law maker, or to adopt principles which she re-
gards as a part of her entire system of female emancipation, it
may be well for them in due time to consider. Such legislation
might possibly gratify men of Abner Kneeland's school, or the
early French revolutionists^ but how any cAmtfon ti^oman, or
any virtuous woman in a christian land, can think of following
such a banner a single step, is among the hard probletns of our
astonishing age !

Not that we are any more opposed to the proper cultivation
of energy, fortitude, activity, and independent thought, in wo-
men, than to the fostering of those more delicate and charming
and humanizing graces by which, whenever wisely fostered,
they have always so extensively ruled and softened and blessed
the stronger half of the rational creation. Nor would we deny
them, as some have done, the vocation of teaching youth, es-
pecially of their own sex. Many, in this way, are now justly
regarded as among the greatest benefactors of their age. We
have no sympathy with that sickly philosophy which would
banish all females from so becoming, so christian, so eminently
useful an employment. Nor would we forbid them to meddle
with the severer studies. Such studies are, of late years much
encouraged in our more evangelical female schools— of which
Miss Martineau seems to know nothing. We are as strongly

408 Mm Martinemfs Warki. [Oct.

opposed as she can be, ^ to leaving nothtog open to the ^
of young ladies but matrimony.' And we think that even her
Unitarian friends, with whom she was chieBy (XMiversant here,
and who may therefore have sat for the picture she lias dra»o
of female pursuits among us, will not thank her for the jostness
of that picture. Nor do we think that the effisminate and
sickly and sickening process of training females ^^hicb she
stigmatizes as prevalent Jiere, is even the artful process for
teaching them ^'to catch men" — such men as are worth
catching. They prefer to be caught by something more sub-
stantial ; nor do they distrust their ability ^^ to govern"
thing more substantial, if need be.

But we do object, most seriously, to a process for tuming
men into men, and, of consequence, men into women ; — and
then turning all to herd together like the brutes by the perfect
freedomof divorce, the annihilation of delicacy, and the prostia*
tion of moral and religious restraints !

We have just spoken of our age, in thb cooDection, as ao
oitonishing age. And we spoke it designedly. It does as-
tonish us, every five years, with some prodigious pioUem in
human action. But in the midst of our profoundest astooisb*
ment at what even some women can become, we wish disuncdy
to say, that we are neither dismayed nor discouraged. Nay, we
do not for one moment waver in our strong belief, that, after all,
the present is one of the most glorious ages the world has ever
seen — ^the most prolific of good, and the most highly fraught
with rational and joyous hope for tiie best interests of humanity.
And even the wild and paradoxical outbreakings, both in prin-
ciple and action, do but in fact confirm this joyous hope. Itb
thus that the history of man and of Providence, bids us inter-
pret these portentous enigmas. For when, since man has been
upon the earth, has there ever been any material advance in
human thought, or any efficient movement for human welfare,
either for time or eternity, that has not been marked and veri-
fied by just such outbreakings? At the coming of Christ, the
devils were let loose in all their fury ; and their legions seemed
clustered from the four winds, and all swanning in Judea, that
focus, for the time, of good as well as bad action and doctrine.
And they were all compelled, too, in due time, to bear testimo-
ny to Christ ! It is at once an illustration and a type of the
universal fact. And then, when the apostles spread abroad the
life-giving Gospel, everywhere there came forth heresies in doe-

1838.] Misi Martintavfi Works. 409

trine and schisms in action, more monstrous than any we now
witness. And again, at the great era of light when the protes-
tant reformation dawned, no arithmetic can compute the forms
of simultaneous error and fanaticism, that started into being.
And women, too, then, as likewise in the days of the apostles,
and now, were found '^ asserting their rights " in the most ab-
surd aod fantastical ways. And, puris naturalibus, some of
them paraded the streets of Mtinster, in company with men,
crying we are the naked truth. No strange thing, then, is hap-
pening to us now. Such people caused Luther, and Paul be-
fore him, more trouble than they can possibly cause us, in this
age of greater civilization. We therefore see no occasion for
dismay ; nor for decrying our period as a retrograde age ; nor
yet for lifting the standard of ultra-conservatismy as some in their
panic seem hastening to do. The pillars of heaven are not
tottering. Nor can the female preachers, whether of right-
eousness or of licentiousness, shake them.. We need not recall
all our energies into the attitude of defence, and abandon our
aggressive enterprises against the kingdom of evil. Neither the
apostles nor the protestant reformers were thus frightened into
their citadel. The church need not stop the victorious march
of her volunteer bands, either through need of their strength
for the defence of her walls, or through a feverish panic, lest,
in such a period, they should wheel, with hostile banners, on the
holy city itself! If the church is now thus frightened, it only
proves her present members unworthy of the glorious age in
which God has cast their lot. But the many cannot be thus
frightened. They are not such raw recruits, without nerve to
stand, or without science to interpret the history of the past or
to discern the signs of the present times. The ship is not
foundering, and we need not throw overboard our most weighty
and precious things. The gale, though stiff, is but wafting her
more swiftly to her haven. — Conservatism, such as Paul's and
Luther's, we roust indeed have. But u/rra-conservatism we
must not invoke, at such a time ; — unless, in fact, we would be
babies — such as deserve, and such as wiU assuredly soon feel
the leading strings of their sisters ! The christian women of
the nineteenth century, enlightened, modest, amiable, obedient
even, as they are and will be, will not, cannot, ought not, to
look supinely on such pusillanimity as this in the leaders of the
Lord's host. Let the church retrograde into such a position,
and we shall soon see a far different sort of women from any
Vol. XII. No. 32. 52

410 Mi$$ Mariineau'i WarJa. [Oct.

that we or the christian world has yet seen, crowding the stage
of public action ; — not, we would trost, to clamor about female
rights, but to show by their efficient deeds, in same way, that
they cannot see a world sink in ruin, without attempting some-
thing. And who will blame them for this, should the time
come when the very ^stones shall cry out P' If good men
would not see such times, and make them too, they will do
well to ponder the whole import of the phrase " christian
prudence,'' till they see that it is often much more imprudent lo
do nothingy than to press on in a course of good action, although
that course must be exposed, in such a world as this, to some
incidental evils, and perhaps great evils. Suddenly to stoD,or
even materially to change the characteristic movements oi an
age, would be often as perilous as it is impossible.

We have dwelt so long on these rather important matters to
the present moment, that we have now but scanty time in
which to notice, as they deserve, the other kindred principles
contained in the books before us.

The uniform tendency of her writings, so far as we have
read them, is directly towards the rankest infidelity. She even
sneers at some portions of the Bible, such as the representation
of heaven under the name of a city. Yet she just as uniferaily
professes to advocate what she would represent as the veiy
essence and life of a truly enlightened Christianity. She takes
Dr. Priestley as her oracle among the departed ; and Dr.
Follen she regards as the greatest man among the living. Dr*
Channing she praises much and censures somewhat, and wouM
except him and a few others from the tremendous inculpations
which she deals forth on certain undesignated unitarian preach-
ers in the region of Boston, for pretending to support in their
pulpits what she thinks they do not believe. She lectures
them smartly, both for their hypocrisy and their cowardice in
not carrying their people forward to new and more perfect de-
yelopments of the unitarian system, and a more complete
emancipation from the remnants of orthodox reverence and
orthodox modes of thought and action in respect to the Bible
and the ordinances of relionon.

^^ I was told a great deal about the first people of Bosttm,
she says ; " whk^h is perhaps as aristocratic, vain, and vulgar a
city — as any in the world. The aristocracy of mere wealth,—
is the only kind of vulgarity I saw in the United States. Boa-
ton is the head quarters of cant. Notwithstanding its superior

1838.] Miss Mariineau's Works. 41 1

mtelligeDce— there is ao extraordinary and most pernicious
union, in more than a few scattered instances, of profligacy and
the worst kind of infidelity, with a strict religious profession, and
an outward demeanor of remarkable propriety. As regards the
canty I believe that it proceeds chiefly from the spirit of caste
which flourishes in a society which, on Sundays and holidays,
professes to have abjured it." We know not how her good
unitarian friends will relish these charges of infidelity, hypocrisy ^
and CANT, from their zealous sister — who, after all, does not so
much blame the infidelity as the cowardice in shrinking from an
open profession of it.

Her views and feelings in regard to missions and other labors
of christian beneficence, may be judged of from the following
remarks, in her account of the fine time she had among the
oflicers and soldiers of fort Mackinaw, on the lakes, where she
learnt something about the Indians and the mission among
them. " There is reason to think that the mission is tlie least
satisfactory part of the establishment on the island. — I fear that
the common process has here been gone through, of attempting
to take from the savage the venerable and the true, and to force
upon him something else which is to him neither venerable nor
true." This, it seems, is not simply the fault of our mission
there, it is ^^ the common process" in protestant missions thus
to take away religious truth and real worship from the savages.
She elsewhere shows herself a great admirer of savage life, as
the French infidels were before her. But if Christianity in any
form is to be forced upon them, she thinks the popish the best*
For she adds : " The English and the Americans, have never
succeeded with the aborigines so well as the French [catbolk^ ;]
and it may be doubted whether the clergy have been a much
greater blessing to them than the traders !" — Nor is it merely
the savages that are injured by protestant evangelization. In
her other book, she intimates clearly enough her admiration of
the Chinese worship compared with our bigotry ; but we have
neither time nor heart to present the case.

By the way, as we have just written the word bigotryy and
as she and her " unitarian friends" are pretty liberal.in their use
of the term, we are reminded of what we intended to show at
some length, but have not room to do it, viz. that we know of
no books in any language more perfectly embued with this

Juality than the two at the head of this article. Johnson de-
nes oigotry, '^ blind zeal, prejudice ; the practice of a bigot."

412 Miss MartineauU Works. [Oct.

And a bigot, he simply tells us, '' i^a man devoted to a certain
party." More zealous and absolute devotedness to party and
to party measures, ^nd those of the rankest kind, we have never
seen. In religion, it is, (wliere it has indeed been found be-
fore,) for the lowest Unitarianism ; — ^in politics, for what io
France was called jacobinism ; — on abolition it is, for " tbe
most straitest sect," and tbe most unflinching party measures.
Wo betide the man or the woman, who swerves or wavers in

0

any one of these matters. He can possess neither talents nor
goodness. If this is not bigotry, neither we nor the lexicogra-
phers can tell what tlie thing is — ^unless, perchance, it be a
term of reproach to be applied exclusively to evangelical and
sober people !

Dr. Beecher, as we have before intimated, she seems to re-
gard as about the worst of bigots. He opposes tbe catholics,
and does not promote the right measures for emancipation, and
be is also orthodox. Nor is she content with repeatedly put-
ting the brand on his forehead. With a vengeance, (though
without expressly naming them in the passage), she visits his
transgressions on his daughters — whose talents and energy we
should at least have supposed would shield them from the con-
tempt, if not the hatred, of such a lover of female energy and
enterprise.

f* Revivals of religion," she of course abhors. But we shall
not stop to quote her here.

Nor is she any more fond of the christian Sabbath as a day of
worship. We must hear her a moment on this vital matter,
though she has a pretty doleful story to tell, before she gets
through, concerning both the desire and " the cowardice " of
our Miss Sedgwick, in regard to destroying that prime bulwark
of vital religion and morality.

*' The asceticism of America is much like that of every other
place. It brings religion down to be ceremonial, constrained, anxious,
and altogether divested of its (ree^ generous, and joyous character.
It fosters timid selfishness in some ; and in others a precise propor-
tion of reckless licentiousness. Its manifestations in Boston are as
remarkable as in the strictest of Scotch towns. Youths in Boston,
who work hard all the week, desire fresh air and exercise, and a
sight of the country, on Sundays. The country must be reached
over the long bridges before-mentioned, and the youths must ride to
obtain their object They have been brought up to think it a sin to
take a ride on Sundays. Once having yielded, and being under a
sense of transgression for a wholly fictitious oflence, they rarely stop

1838.] Miss Martintau's Works. 413

there. They next join parties to smoke, and perhaps to drink, and
80 on. If they had but been brought up to know that the Sabbath,
like all times and seasons, was made for man, and not man fof the
Sabbath ; that their religion is in their state of mind, and not in the
arrangement of their day, their Sabbaths would most probably have
been spent as innocently as any other day.^^ — Vol. ii. p. 341.

This is in perfect accordance with all her teaching elsewhere,
and with her practice, so far as she has seen fit, (rather osien-
tatiously sometimes); to publish it. For instance, she some-
where tells us how, on a Sabbath when in a steamboat on the
Mississippi, she scorned to listen to a sermon which a minister on
board was preaching, and preferred to be about something
else. — But we must return to the same page again, and hear
her lecture to her admired and bosom friend. Miss Sedgwick, of
the good puritanic town of Stockbridge, Mass.

*'*' The author of ^ Home * arranged the Sunday in her book, some-
what differently from the usual custom ; describing the family whose
home she pictured as spending the Sunday afternoon on the water, afler
a laborious week, and an attendance on public worship in the morning.
Religious conversation was described as going on throughout the day.
So much offence was taken at the idea of a Sunday sail, that theeai-
tor of the book requested the author to alter the chapter ; the first
print being proposed to be cancelled. I am sorry to say that she did
alter it If she was converted to the popular superstition, (which
could scarcely be conceived), no more is to be said. If not, it was
a matter of principle which she ought not to have yielded. If books
are to be altered, an author^s convictions to be unrepresented, to
avoid shocking religious prejudices, there is a surrender, not only of
the author's noblest prerogative, but of his highest duty." — p. 341.
Note.

How Miss Sedgwick will relish this severe castigation and
this more tremendous breach of confidence in revealing a bad
secret whk^h it had cost so much trouble and money to suppress,
and all this, by a bosom friend whom she had so long welcomed
in ber village and at her home, we are not able to decide. We
hope the loss of character, in the eye of her own New England,
will not make her quite as reckless in her own future conduct or
writings, as the Boston Sabbath-breakers become by their ex-
posure on the bridges. If so, we must tremble at the appear-
ance of her next book. But how could Miss M. be so incon-
sistent with the principle she had just noticed so strongly — and
how could she be so ungrateful and cruel toward her admired

414 SiKu Martineau^s Works. [Oct.

and confidential friend, as thus to expose and thus to tempt
her ! — Or are we to understand all this, and all ber revelations
respecting her Boston friends, as only a sound and integral part
of that improved code of human intercourse between Sabbath-
breakers, which is to take the place of God's law ?

However plausible may be the arguments, in some cases, fiv
the violation of the Sabbath, and however insidious the attacks
of those who hate its restraints, we confess we can regard tbe
unblushing authors of such attacks, in no other light than that of
the most dangerous enemies to human society on earth, and hu-
man felicity hereafter. Send young people off on a Sabbath
excursion of pleasure, by land or water, and it matters little tbat
you set them to conversing on religion. It will at best be bat
a blind-fold to their consciences — ^if it be not in (act such con-
versation as we find in the book before us, and fitted only to
poison the very life of all conscience. — ^And then for ttamoi
openly to preach the desecration of the Sabbath ; women, who
owe to the benign and humanizing influence of the Puritan Sab-
bath, all the elevation they enjoy in England and this countiy
above their degraded sisters of continental Europe and the rest
of the world ; for womeiiy thus fostered and blessed by such a
Sabbath, to lead the very van for its destruction, is but another
instance where fact surpasses fiction and belies the conomon
principles of our rational nature.

But there are other most serious changes in morals and reli-
gion, with which this reforming law-giver proposes to usher in
the new reign of perfect freedom. The few we can stand to
notice, respect chiefly the clergy, and their modes of influence.
She laughs at their ' scruples about playing cards, and at tbat
" Boston prudery" which prevents their attending the theatre.'
<^ The clergy should dance, like others, as they have the same
kind of bodies to be animated, and of minds to be exhilarated.**
She would have them change their whole demeanor, and min-
gle in all the gaities of fashionable life. Their present influence,
she thinks most baneful. She would also have them mingle in
all the political strifes of the day. ' Nay, they must engage
eagerly in worldly pursuits. And that for the very purpose of
making them like other worldly men, and no longer bigoted
fools.' '^ The ascetk^ practice of taking care of (xie another's
morals," and of minister's taking care of them as they do,
alarms her exceedingly, and she is glad to find at least one min-
ister to join her in devising a remedy.

1888.] Miss Martineau's Works. 415

** A most libeml-minded clergyman, a man as democratic in his
religion, and as genial in his charity, as any layman in the land,
remarked to me one day on the existence of this strong religious
sensibility in the children of the Pilgrims, and asked me what I
thought should be done to cherish and enlarge it, we having been
alarming each other with the fear that it would be exasperated by
the prevalent superstition, and become transmuted, in the next
generation, to something very unlike religious sensibility. We pro-
posed great changes in domestic and social habits: less formal
relisious observance in families, and more genial interest in the
intellectual provinces of religion : more rational promotion of health,
by living according to the laws of nature, which ordain bodily exer-
cise ana mental refreshment We proposed that new temptations
to walking, driving, boating, etc. should be prepared, and the de-
lights of natural scenery, laid open much more freely than they are ;
that social amusements of every kind should be encouraged, and all
religious restraints upon speech and action removed : in short, that
spontaneousness should bie reverenced and approved above all
thiji0, whatever form it may take.'^ — p. 345.

^^ Symptoms of the breakuig out of the true genial spirit of liberty
were continually delighting me. A Unitarian clergyman, complain-
ing of the superstition of the body to which he belonged, while they
were perpetually referring to their comparative freedom, observea,
^* We are so bent on standing fast in our liberty, that we don^t get
on." Another remarked upon an eulosy bestowed on some one
as a man and a Christian : ^' as if," said me speaker, *'*' the Christian
were the climax I as if it were not much more to be a man than a
Christian !"— p. 346.

What a revealer of the secrets of some of the clergy ! Let
us now see what she says of the clergy as a mass.

** The American clersy are the most backward and timid class in
the society in which they live ; self-exiled from the great moral
questions of the time ; the least informed with true knowledge ; the
least efficient in virtuous action ; the least conscious of that christian
and republican freedom which, as the native atmosphere of piety
and holiness, it is their prime duty to cherish and diffuse." — p. 353.

** Seeing what I have seen,! can come to no other conclusion than
that the most guilty class of the community in regard to the slavery
question at present is, not the slave-holding, nor even the mercantile,
but the clerical : the most guilty, because not only are they not
blinded by life-long custom and prejudice, nor by pecuniary interest,
but they profess to spend their lives in the study of moral relations,
and have pledged themselves to declare the whole counsel of God.**
—p. 856.

416 Miss Martineau^s Works, [Oct.

About all the good Miss MartiDeau thinks the clergy can do,
is to preach such, things as abolitionism and women's rights;
and these, alas, they will not do. In the notice we havecn-
casionaily taken of this woman's abolition principles, it will not
be understood that we design at all to meddle witli this questioo
as a party matter among ourselves. She as a foreigner seems
to suppose, (absurdly enough,) that all who oppose a certain
set of measures for abolition, are either hostile or cold towards
the cause of einancipation.

Though she considers " the American clergy the least in-
formed with true knowledge," still, so far as religious science
is concerned, the acting pastoi-s are spoiled by koowtog loo
much. They should know nothing of it. "The scientific
study and popular administration of relrgion," she roourofuUjr
says, " have not only been confided to the same persons, iwt
aotunlly mixed up and confounded in the heads and hands of
those persons." She would have a few recluses study the
doctrines of religion, though it would unfit them for the pastoral
work. But the pastors, the preachers of religion, (or rather of
politics,) should study, the politics and the exciting topics of the
clay, — should know how to play at cards, and to dance, and to
grace the drawing rooms ; — ^but should not dream of entenof
the chamber of sickness, or the house of mourning, except it be
the hovel of extreme poverty ! She ridicules a minister for at-
tempting to console a bereaved mother; but we must omit the
passage and give only the following short one.

" Over those who consider the clergy ' faithful guardiaiis,' their
influence, as far as it is professional, is bad : as far as it is that «
friendship or acquaintanceship, it is according to the charactersoi
the men. I am disposed to think ill of the effects of the practice of
parochial visiting, except in cases of poor and afflicted persons, who
have little other resource of human sympathy. I caooot enlai^
upon the disagreeable subject of the devotion of the ladies to ine
clergy. I believe there is no liberal-minded minister who does net
see, and too sensibly feel, the evil of women being driven bacK
upon religion as a resource against vacuity ; and of there being a
professional class to administer it. Some of the oKJst sensible aw
religious elderly women I know in America speak, with a strengia
which evinces strong conviction, of the mischief to their sex «
ministers entering the profession young and poor, and with a P^
enthusiasm for parochial visiting. There is no very wide different
between the auricular confession of the catholic church, and tue
spiritual confidence reposed in ministers the most devoted 1o visiting

1tt8f.) MUi MarAnemft World. 417

their flocks.' Eboagh may be seen in the religious periodicals of
America about the he!^ women sive fo' youh^ ministers by the
needle, by raising subscriptions:, and by mofe toilsome labors than
they should be altowed to undergo in such a cause.^^ — p. 363.

The influence of the isolated clergy, she tells us, is " con-
fined to the weak members of society, women and superstitious
men." And not only does she despise the wecfk women for
their friendliness to ministers, but she ridicules them for reading
the Bible as they do. ** I saw women — labormg at their New
Testament, reading superstitiously a daily portion of that which
was already too famiKar to the ear to leave any genuine and
lasting impression, thus read."

Nor is it merely, nor perhaps chiefly, the orthodox clei^y
that she has in view, as the Unitarians were the men of whom
she knew mosu

'^The fearful and disgraceful mistake about the true nature of the
clerical office, — ^the supposition that it consists in adapting the truth
to the minds of the hearers, — ^is already producing its effect in
thinning the churches, and impelling the people to find an adminis-
tration of religion better suited to their need. The want of iaith in
other men and in principles, and the superabundant. faith in them-
selves, shown in this notion of pastoral duty, (which had been actually
preached, as well as pleaded in private,) are so conspicuous, as to
need no further exposure. The history of priesthoods may be re-
ferred to as an exhibition of its consequences. I was struck at first
with an advocacy of ordinances among some of the Unitarian .
c^^rgy, which I was confident must go beyond their own belief. I
was told that a great point was made of them, (not as observances
but as ordinances,) because the public mind required them. I saw a
minister using vehement and unaccustomed action, (of course wholly
inappropriate,) in a pulpit not his own ; and was told ihat that set of
people required plenty of action to be assured the preacher was in
earnest.*^ — p. 357.

What will her Unitarian brethren say of these revelations of
their hypocrisy ? Again,

^^My final impression is, that religion is best administered in
America by the personal character of the most virtuous members of
society, out of the theological proibssion : and next, by the acts and
preachings of the members of that profession who are the moat
secular in their habits of mind and life. ^ The exclusively clerk^al are
the worst enemies of Christianity, except the vicious." — ^p. 364.

Nor are we yetiit tbe bottom. * Beneath this lowest depth,
there is still a lovirer deep.* AH cannot be accomplished in a
Vol. XIL No.*32. 58

418 Miti lihrtintauU Worh^. [Oer.

day ; and therefore she is at the trouble of felling bow tfo
clergy should be reformed and rendered more harmless, so Umg
as clergy and churches are still to be borne as an incubus on
society.

But when the regimen of women shall . have fully come,
(perhaps old John Knox himself would not now dare to call k
'' tlie abominable regiment of women,") when that illustrioos
era of liberty and equality, shall arrive, if not before, all cbaich-
es are to be disbanded ! And the gospel ministry is to be an-
nihilated ! '< The worst enemies of Christianity" and of man,
will cease from the face of. the whole earth. For, she
tinnes.

*^The fault is not in the Voluntary System; for the
equally bad on both sides the Atlantic : and an Establishment Eke
the English does little more than superadd the danger of a caieleaa,
ambitious, worldly clergy, in the ncher priests of the church, and
an overworked and ill-recompensed set of working clergy. The
evil lies in a superstition which no establishment cab ever obviate ;
in the superstition, to use the words of an American clergyman, ** of
believing that religion is something else than goodness." From
this it arises that an ecclesiastical profession still exists ; not for the
study of theological science, (which is quite reasonable,) but for the
dispensing of goodness. From this it arises that ecclesiastical
goodness is practically sepeu^ted from active personal and social
goodness. Prom this it arises that the yeomanry of America, those
who are ever in the presence of Grod's high priest. Nature, and out
6f the worldly competitions of a society sophisticated with super-
stition, are perpetually in advance of the rest of the community on
the great moral questions of the time, while the clei^ are in the
rear.

^^ What must be done ? The machinery of administration must
be changed. The people have been brought up to suppose that
they saw Christianity in their ministers. The first consequence of
this mistake was, that Christianity was extensively misunderstood ;
as it still is. The trying moral conflicts of the time are acting as a
test ,Tbe people are rapidly discovering that the supposed fiathful
mirror is a grossly refracting medium ; and the blcissed consequence
will be, that they will look at the object for themselves, declining
any medium at all. The clerical profession is too hard and too
perilous a one, too little justifiable on the ground of principle, too
much opposed to the spirit of the gospel, to outlive long the individ-
ual research into religion, to which the faults of the clergy are daily
impelling the people.

^* To what then must we riieantime trust for religion ? — ^To tfie
administration of God, and the heart of man. Has not God his ova

18W.] Mi$$ Martimau's fVorkt. 419

ways, wiXke our ways, of teaehing when man misteachear? It is
wcNTth tnTelling in mer wild west, away from churches and priests,
to see how religion springs up in the pleasant woods, and is nour-
ished by the wmds and tl^ star-light The child on the grass is not
alone in listening for Grod-^s tramp on the floor of his creation. We
aie all children, ever so listening/^— pp. 364, 366.

^^ The dignity of theological study arises from its being subservi-
ent to the administration of religion. The last was Cbrist^s own
office ; the highest which can be discharged by man : so high as to
mdicate that when its dignity is fully understood, it will be confided
to the hands of no class of men. Theologians there will probably
always be ; but no man will be a priest in those days to come when
every man will be a woishipper.^'-^p. 331.

Thus it is that she closes her first and chief work on
America ! The other work is a hasty after piece, designed to
give Europeans some clearer views of tlie routes she took and
the things she saw here ; and is a much feebler performance.
Her descriptions of scenery are poor, being confused and indis-
tinct.

Should any blame us for a want of delicacy in treating the
performance of a woman in the way we have done, we would
ask them just to run their eye over our pages again, and see if
we have used any hard epithets, or have been guilty of any
other indelicacy than that of suffering her to speak for herself
through these pages. On this last point, we confess we have
felt some misgivings ; nor could we have suffered her thus to
speak, bad we not hoped, as we still do hope, that it may prove
a timely warning to such, (if there be any,) as may need warn-
ing in respect to following in the train of measures which she
commends for the attainment of equal rights and human felksity
on earth. We wish them to look, as she does, at the system
as one grand and connected whole, and then to judge of all its
parts, and of its authors.

In closings we must betillowed to remind our readers of what
we intimated at the beginning, that we have not undertaken to
review Miss Martineau's works as a whole. Our chief object
has been, to present the moral and religiotu aspect of the
works before us. It has been a painful task. But in the dis^
charge of this delicate and rather perilous duty, it has been our
constant aim, to render ample honor to the better half of crea-
tion ; and not only so, but to do What lies in our power to rescue
them from the opprobrium that must practically accrue to their
general character irom such examples as the one which has now

439 Viem of the Early Beformers. [Oct.

been glaring before the .world. To show that tbb is not a &ir
sample — to guard against its baleful eSeois — and to give timely
waroiog agaiost its imitation, we hope will not prove a oseks
labor, however inglorious. Much more congenial would itbafe
been to our feelings, to call the attention of our readers to some
among the many bright pages m these books — ^pages deeplf
frougbt with interest, and often highly flattering to American
feeling. But the moral bearing of the whole, has ruined tbe
whole. A mind of uncommon power, hot with tbe (anaticinB
of infidel and visionary politics, and blindly hastening to precipi-
tate society into the gulf of licentiousness, is among the aid*
dest spectacles since the fall of mother Eve*

ARTICLE VII.
What were the Views ^entertained bt the Early Ri-

.FORMERS ON THE DoCTRINES OF JUSTIFICATION, FaITH,

AND THi: Active Obedience of Christ?

Bj Ror. ft. W. Landbf JeflfWraonTillft, Pa. [Cooclnded rrom ptge 197]

^ IH. VieiDs of the Reformers on the Obedience of CkriiU

On this topic our position is that even if those who bire
been complained of as unsound in tbe faith* had denied tbe im-

* Tbe following extracis will afford tbe reader a brief view of (bt
controversy which now exists io relaiion to this subject, and of the
importance which is attached to it hy many. Dr, JuokJn'tf niiitb
charge against Mr. Barnes is in theae words : ^ Mr. Barnes denies rhat
tbe righleousness, i. e. the active obedience of Christ to the law, is im-
puted to his people for their justification ; so that they are righteous
in tho eye of the law, and therefore justified.^' This charge be eo-
deavjors to establish by various quotations frotn Mr. Barnes^ book ;
upon which^ among other remarks, he 0|»enks as follows:— '^ The ■-
tence>of this book of N'otiv on tbe subject of Christ's rigbieotMiea^
(i. e» his active obedience,) being imputed to his people for tbeirjiMi-
ficatton, gives ground to a stroug presumption that the doctrioe is is*
jected by its author. To this I know it will bs olyected, tJiac 'i^ *
bard to condemn a man for what he does not say. Mr. BaoMS ^^

1888.J Vhw oftkt Early Re/ormen. 42)

pHtatioQ of Christ's active obedience, they might stiD bold th«
very same views of the doctrine of Justification, which were

•^^1—^— ^.iM ■■■ ■■■■ ■ —^ ■ ^,■■^■■^■l■^■■,^a■■»,,, , m > - m,^ — i ■ — - ■ ■— ■ i ■ ■ ^ ■! ■

bound, in expounding this Epistle, to mnke the doctrine of ibe impu-
ted righteousness of Christ, and pwrlxctdarly his active obedience, the
prominent feature of his work. In a thousand texts it is clearly stated
that Hgbteonsness is the title to life : righleousnesi the adual andadivi
ebedienee to lauf,and iahation^ art unUed as antecedent and eonsequeni,"
^-'^Tum back to the quotation from p. 127. There is^he whol«
comment on the phrase ' By tl>e obedience of .one.' On which a real
Calvinistic Presbyterian would have given bis heart full flow, and let
his pen run nunpont > But there you have it, text and comment, in
five brief lines. Now I ask. Why this brevity ? Why is thut by
which many are made righteous, dismissed so cnvalierly ? Why is
this, which lie admits stands opposed to the disobedience of Adam,
hurried out of sight ? If it stands opposed, is it not the opposite of
Adam's disobedince ? Aiul what is the opposite of disobedience?'
IS it not obedience ? and what is disobedience but want of conformi-
ty with law ? Must not then the obedience which is the opposite <i€
this be ooofbrmity with taw? — aetivt eamplianett Oh I^ bow rould
my brother shut his eyes against this most glorious point of gospel
truth ?•— a point on which all the bright rays of the Sun of righteous*
ness converge to a focus, that might make the eyes of an archangel
blench ; and shrivel like a parrhed scroll, the entire legions of lost,
spirits who can never say through grace, * The Lord is my righteous-
ness' But so it is. Admitting the truth that the obedience of the
sne is Christ's, and that it includes his entire work, he tries to turn it
ofll^ by quoting Phil. ^ 3, * He — became obedient unto death' — italfcis-
ing obedient to make the reader think that all Christ's work consisted
in suffering. Ah ! this Parthian arrow is not medicated with Fre»*
byterian oil." See Vindication, pp. 122—130.

To this charge Mh Barnes replies aa followa : " My general plea is,
that the char^ge is not siistaineid by the imssiiges which are quoted -
from my book. The charge is that I have denied that * the aciivo
obedience of Christ is imputed to his people for their justification ;
and is followed by an it^erenee of Dr. Junkin from this, that I also
deny that they 'are righteous in the sight of the law.' in reganl to
this I olwerve, 1. Tliat the charge is not that I denied that the liene*
fits of the work of Christ are imputed to men, or that they werejusti*
fied on account of what he had done. So explicit were my repeated
declarations on this subject, that it was not possible to allege that I
denied this. 2. I have not denied that the active obedience of Christ
is imputed to his people. 3. I have not denied that his people are
' righteous in the sight of the law, and therefore justified.' This is
another of the injurious and unfounded inferences which Dr. Junkin
has felt himself at liberty to charge me with holding. In the very

4S8 VteufM oftht Early Refuvf^rs. [On,

entertained by all the first Reformers without one solituy a-
ceptbn. Tbey all, witb unanimous conseot, affirmed the phis,
simple, scriptural doctrine to be, tbat we are justified by the
death of Cbrist, when on account of it (cum propter earn is tbe
ever-recurring expression) we have obtained the forgiveoess of
sins. If then the charge were substantiated, that certain breth-
ren do really reject tbe imputation of Christ's active obedieaoe
for justification, it would still furnish not one particle of proof
tbat they have abandoned the articuluB stantis vel cadeniit tc-
ckiute.

The question in relation to this topic, was actually unkoovn
to the church until after the death oj Calvin. It was, by some
obscure individuals, started about A. D. 15G4; and drew after
it the query, whether justification consisted in pardon only; to-
gether with a host of similar questions. . For a long time after
it was started it received but little attention. Dr. Pareus de-
clared it to be. a questbn which called forth *^ more of dang^
ous speculation, than of solid truth, and more of ieamin^ tlMo
of faith.''* About the year 1570, it was introduced at Wiuem-
berg, but it seems to have died away because no one appeared
to regard it as a subject worthy of serious consideration. Prior
to this tinae, however, no eminent writer among the reforrocrs
notices the distinction. They content themselves witb sayip^,
as above remarked, that we are justified by the death of Christ,
when on account of it we have forgiveness of sin.f

paamges which he Una quoted, I have affirmed the contraiy." ^
Defence^ pp. 255 — 257.

In the Mnute* of the GenemY AMembly of 1837, in felation to tbe
same charge, thoae who were considered as emeitainiog views mmikr
to thoae of Mr. Baniea, made tbe fullowitig disclaimer : *^ All believen
are justified, not on the ground of personal merit, but solely on (^9
grmind of tbe obedience and death, or, in other words, tbe rigbteooi*
ness of Christ. And while that righteousness does not become tbeiiii
in tbe sense of a literal transfer of personal qualities and meiit', p^
from respect to it, God can, and does treat them aa if tbey were right*
eous.** See Prottnt^ pp. 481-^-486^

* ^ Plus periculosae subtilitatis, qnam solidae veritatis: plosqoeii-
genii quam fidei."

f Protestants should be careful on this subject lest when tbey ob-
ject against the pope^s making new articles of faith (statuere articolM
fidei) the argument be retorted. For in the instance before d^ ''^
in the others above noticedi we have aeen, in the lapse of two eeani-

1838.] Vhm ^tht Early Rtformen. 488

Subsequently, however, when the French Synod manifested
a good deal of zeal on the subject ; and after it bad by a vote
decided what was orthodox in relation to it ; (he distinction was
more geoeraliy considered by theologians, in their writings, as
we shall remark hereafter. This Synod distinguished itself, by
the great anxiety it evinced to have the distinction regarded.
It wrote to all the eminent schools and academies ; and even
to many learned individuals, pressing the subject upon their at-
tention. But the writings of Gomar have done more to en-
stamp it with the features of Calvinism, than those of all his
contemporaries. He was likewise perpetually incukating the
distinction upon the minds of bis pupils ; and as one of his
friends very sagely remarks, <^ correcting the opposite errors
found scattered about even in the writings of great men," (in
magnorura etiam virorum scriptis sparsos 0 that is, be became
the Incfex Expurgatorius of the Reformation. For the pains
which he took on this subject, however, he was by the primi-
tive school of Calvinists styled by the ungracious appellation of
an innotaior. Whether this charge was without foundation,
the reader will determine for himself presently.

As the principle embraced in the topic now before us, is so
interwoven with the two preceding, that it is extremely difficult
to separate them, the reader will excuse us, if the quotations
whk^h we now make should sometimes express views similar to
those presented in the preceding sections of this article.

For reasons before expressed we deem it unnecessary to go
into a detailed examination of the views of the original reform-
ers. We shall conBne our attention principally to those who
lived and wrote after the distinction referred to began to be
made.

The language of the first reformers on this subject was in en*
tire unison with that of the primitive church ; of Austiny for
instance, who says, '^ Our sanctuary is the pardon of sins, which
is to be justified by bis blood. When the Father is displeased
with us, he considers the death of his Son and is reconciled.
M^ entire hope is in the death of my Lord. His death is my
MERIT, my REFUGE, my SALVATION, my LITE, and my resur-
rection.* This is the unifonn language of the first reformers

ries, that Don-cssenlial points of doctrine have expanded into artielea
of faith in every sense of the word.

* For the original, see Vol. XK p. 454.

4M View of the JSbr/y Refmrmen, [Oct.

without exoeptioD. In proof of tbie it will he neoeflsary oolfto
quote the language of Calvin, and a few coofessioiis. Our
other references shall he to divines of a later date.

I. We begin with Calvin. After quoting with approbttioa
the following passages from Hilary, '' the cross, the deaih, sod
the descent of Christ into hades, are our life ;" and ^* Tbe Soo
of God is in hades, but man is brought back again to Heaven,"*
he goes on again to speak as follows : *' Therefore, altboogh
we possess in (he death of Christ the entire accomplishment of
our salvation, because by it we are reconciled to God, the law
satisfied, the curse taken away, and the puntshnieDt eodured;
yet we affirm that it is not by his death, but by bis resurreciioa
thai we are born again unto a lively hope, (1 Pet. 1:3.) as he
appeared the conqueror of death by ri»ng again ; so tbe victoiy
01 our faith is stayed upon bis resurrection : or, as it is beoer
expressed in the words of Paul, when he says, He died for our
sins, be was raised again for our justification^ Rom. 4: 25. As
if he had said, sin was taken away by his death, rightcoiisnai
was renewed and restored 6y his resurrection. For liowcooU
he have liberated us from death, by dying, if he himself had
yielded to death ? How could he have purchased victory ibr
us, if he had fallen in the conflict ? Wherefore we thus pro-
cure the material of our own salvation between tbe death aod
the resurrection of Christ : because, by the former his sia was
abolished and death destroyed ; and by the latter, rigbteousans
was repaired and life restored. So that, however, by the heo-
efit of the latter, tbe former brings to us its force and efficieoej.
Therefore we remember, tbat as often as there is mention inada
of his death alone, there is at the same time included tbereio,
that which pertains to the resurrection. The same may be if-
firmed when his resurrection alone is spoken of ; that it like-
wise includes what is peculiar to his death.^f Here then is
the sentiment of Calvin. When the death of Christ is spokea
of, his resurrection is included. And it is to ^Aese alone, aad
not to his active obedience before death, that he attributes oar
complete salvation. But let us hear him again.

* "Crux, morsyinferi, nostra vita sunt. — Filius Dei in infernifflM:
aed homo refertur ad coeltiiu." — Calvini InstU, Lib. II. cap. J6L

t " Proinde tainetsi in ejus morle haliemus aolidum aalutis compla-
roentuiu, quia |ier earn et Deo recoaciliati 8umu«,et joatoejusjutfKftf
•atiafiietum, et maledictio aublala, at peiaotuia cat |Mana: dieSamr

1688.} Views of the Early Reformers. 425

»

In the follbwing passage the reader will perceive how entire-
ly Calvin avoids making any mention of Christ's active obe*
dience, though he is summing up in the minutest manner every part
of his merit from which salvation and happiness are derived to us..
His words are : " But when w*e behold that the entire sum of
dur salvation, and all its parts, are comprehended in Christ, let
us be warned not to seek the least particle of it from another.
If life be sought, we^ in the name of Jesus teach^ that it is at
hife disposal. If any other gifts of the Spirit are sought, what-
ever they might be they are found in his unction. If patience,
it IS found in the assurance that he reigns. If purity, in his
conception. If indulgence, think of his nativity, by which he
wa§ made like to us in all things, that he might be able to suffer.
If redemption is sought, seek it in his suffering ; if absolution, in
his condemnation ; if remission of the curse, in his cross ; if sat-
isfaction, in his sacrifice ; if purgation, in his blood ; if reconcil-
iation, in bis descent into hades ; if mortification of the flesh, in
bis burial. If newness of life, in bis resurrection ; if immor-
tality ^ in the same ; if an inheritance in the heavenly kingdom, in
his entrance into heaven ; if protection, defence, if abundance of
all good, look for it in his kingdom. If you desire security, in
the expectation of judgment, look to the power of judging which
has been committed to him. To conclude, in this treasury
ther^ is contained every thing that can constitute happiness ;
from thence you mdy draw, and be satisfied, but not nroin any

tamen non per mortem, sed per reeurrectiooeni regenerati in spen:^
vivain(l Pet. 1:3): quia ut ille resurgendo victor mortis eroersit, itA
fidei nostnie victoria in ipsa demum conjsisiit resurrectione. Qu^e
hoc sit, melius Pauli verbis exprimitur : moriuum enim dicit propter
peccnta nostm, suscitatum. propter nostrani juetificationem (Rom. 4:
25]: acsi diceret, morte ejtissublalum peccatum, rcsurreciione instoo*
mtuin restitutamque justitinm. Quomodo enim mpriendo lil^erare,
no9 a morte poternt, si morti ipse succubuisset ? quomodo comparaa-
set nobis victoriani, si in certamine defecisset ? Quare sic salutia
postrae materiatn inter Christi mortem et resurrfictionem partimur,
quod per illam peccatum abolitum, et mors exiincta: per banc, justi-
tia reparato, et erecta vita : n'lc lumen ut hujus l)eneficio vim efficaci-
amque auam ilia nobis proferat. Proinde memimerimus, quoties 80-
lius mortis sit inentio, siinul compr«;bendi quod proprium est resur-
rectionis: parem quoque synecdocben e8t<e in voce reswrrectioni$^
quoties scorsum a morte ponitur: ut sectun Irahal, quod pecMliaMior
morti convenit."— (72 supra, Cap. If. secL 13.

Vol. XII. No. 32. 54

4516 VUw$ of the Earfy lUformerg. [Oct.

other."* Not ooe word here about any thing flowing to of
from his active obedience.

Once more. " But that Christ by his obedience, truly merited
and acquired favor with tbe Father for us, can be clearly and
(lilly collected from many places in the Scriptures. For this I
take for granted, that if Christ made satisfaction for our sins, if
he paid thoroughly the penalty due to qs ; if his obedience
pleased God, and to conclude, if the just sufiered ibr tbe oojust;
then his righteousness obtained salvatron for us, just in propor-
tion as it availed and deserved. Truly as is testified by Ptul)
we are reconciled, and obtain reconciliation by his death (Rom.
5: 11). But reconciliation cannot exist, unless where the
offence precedes. The sense therefore is that God, to whom
we are hateful on account of sin, has become appeased by t&e
death of his Son, so that he is now pacified towands us. And it
should be particularly noticed what the antithesis b which fol-
lows in Rom. 2: 19 : * As by the transgression of ooe, many
were constituted sinners : so even by obedience many werecoo-
stituted righteous.' For the sense is, as we are alienated from
God, and destined to destruction by the sin of Adam, so by the
obedience of Christ, we were received into favor as righteous.—
In all other respects, when we affirm that grace was obuincd
for us by the merit of Christy we thereby understand thai we
are cleansed by his blood, and that his death is an expiatioa for
our sins. ^ His blood cleanses us from sin.' His blood was pou^

* *^ Qtiando autem totnm sal litis nostrae sumroain ac singulas eliim
partes videmus in Christo comprehensaa, cavendum na vel eniuiiiaai
partiunculam alio derivemus. Si salus quaeritur, ipso Domioe Jcm
docc^mur, penes enm esse : si Spiritus alia qtiaelihit dona, in ejitf ow-
iSone reperientnr : si fortitudo, in ejus domtiiio : si puritaB, in ^^
eonceptione : si indulgentia, in ejus nativitaie se proftrt, qua &ctof
«st nobis per omnia aimiliff, lit condolescere discerei : m redeiopt^ la
ejus paasione : si abeolutio, in ejus damnatione : si malediciioDiB f«-
inimiOyin ejus cruce: si aatiafactio , in ejus sacrificio: si purgatifsio
ejits sanguine: si reconciliatio, in descensu ad inferos: si mortificatio
earnis, in ejus sepulchro: si vitae novitas, in ejus resurrections: a
im mortal ita«, in eadem : si haereditas regnl coelestis, in coeli infre^
§a i si praesidium, si seetiritas, ai bonoruin omnium copia ei faculta^
in ejus regno: si secura jiidicii expectatio, in potestate judicandi ei|KC-
tatto, in potestate judicandi illi tradiia. Deinque in ipso thesauro omoe
genus bonorum quum sint, inde ad satieutein haoriantur, non wr
nnde.'* — V^ Sup. Cap. XVI. sect. 19.

J

1838.] Views of the Early Reformers. 4Sn

ed out for the remission ofsins^ (1 John 1: 7, Luke 22: SO). If
this IS the effect of his blood being poured out^ that our sins are
not imputed to us^ it follows that with that price the justice of
€fod is satisfied. — For it is superfluous^ and therefore absurd,
that Christ should have been burdened with the curse, unless
that by enduriiig what was due to others^ he obtained righteoiLs^
ness for them. Paul commends the grace of God in this, that
he gave the price of redemption in the death of Christ : then
he enjoins on us to flee to hts blood, that having obtained right'
eousness, we may stand secure at the judgment seat. There-
fore the same apostle defines redemption in the blood of Christ
to be forgiveness of sins (Col. 1: 14), as if he would say that
we are justified, or absolved before God because that blood has

yielded satisfaction for us."* A hundred similar passages could

>■ ■...■■■ , . , . . ■ -«« ■

• '^ Quod aiitem vers Chrmtos sua obedientta nobte gratiam apu<i(
Pafrem acquisieric ac promeritui ait, ex ptariboi terifiturae locis eer*'
to et aolide colligitur. Nam hoc pro cofifeaso suma, si pro peccatb
noBtrb Christua aatiafecit, si po^oam nobis debitain persoivit, si obe*
dieotia sua Deuni pJacayit, deniquo si Justus pro injustis passus eHi
justttia ejus partatn nobis saliitem, quod tantuodem valet ac promere*
ri.' Atqui teste Paulo reconciliati sumus, et reconciliationeni accipi-
mus per ejus mortem (Rom. 5: 11 ): Atqui reconciliatio locum non
faabet, nisi ubi offensio praecessit. Sensus ergo est, Deum, cui pro|)»^
ter peccatum eramus exosi, morte Filii sui placatum Aiisse, ut nobis'
ait propitius; Ac diligenter nolanda est, quae paulo post sequitor
antithesis (Rom. 5: 13): 'Sicuti per transgresslonem uniiis peccato-'-
res eonatituti sunt muhi : sic et per obedieotiam justi constituuntur^
multi.' Sensus enim est : Sicut Adae peccato alienati Deo sumus et
destiMti ad imeritum, sfta Obristi obedientta, nos in favorem recepi'
tan«fuam jusios. N«e futuntm verbi tempus praeaemem justitiam-
cgmludii : aicuti OX oMiiaxttt. apparel. Nam et >prius dixerat, xdi^wjit»
ex mukia deliatia ease in juattficatiooani^ Gaataruai quum dicimua,/
Cbriati naeffimm pavtam bobia.ease ipmciaiD, boa. inieiUi^simis, aaivii
gttiaa ejus nos fulsse mundatoa, et ^us monein expiaitoneaa ftiisatt.
pro' paoeatisi ' Banguis ejus aroundat noa a peccato. Hie sanguiaj
est, qui efTunditur io reoHsaiooetn pecoaiorum' (1 Jo. 1: 7. Luc. 2S^
20), 8i hie effectus est fusi sanguinis) ut non imputantur nobis pec-
catSy sequitur eo pretio satisfactum esse judicio Dei. — Supervacuuiq,
eoim, adeoque absurdum fuitj onerari Christum maledictione, nisi uk,
quod alii debebant persolvens, justitiam illis acquiveret. — Gratiam Del
in hoc commendat Paulus, quia redemtionis pretium debit in Cbristi
Diorte: deinde jubet nos cohfugere ad ejus sangujoem, ut justitian)
adepti coram Dei judicio securi stemus. — Ideo idem Apostolus, re-
demptlohem in sanguine Cbristl definit admissionem peccatoruin (Col.

4S!B Views of the Early Jkfomen^ [Oct.

be easily adduced, id which Calvin affinnstbat the obedieoce of

Christ, by which we obtain righteousness and eternal life, is his
passive obedience alone.

II. Our next reference shall be to the Heidelbtrg Cattdiim
— the Calvinistic Catechism of the Reformed Churches. lo
answer to Question 37, " What dost thou understand by the
words, * He suffered ?' It is said, " That he, all the time that
be lived on earth, but especially at the end of his life, sustained
in body and soul the wrath of God against the sins of all man-
kind ; that so 6y his sufferings as the only propitiatory sacri6ce,
he might redeem our body and soul from- everlasting damnatioo,
and obtain. for us the favor of God, righteousness and eternal
life.^^* In answer to Question 66, " What arc the Sacra-
ments ?" It is remarked, " The sacraments are holy visible
signs and seals, appointed of God for this end, that by the use
thereof, be may tiie more fully declare and seal to us the prom-
ise of ib9 Gospel, viz. tbai lie. grants us freely the fi>i|:iveiie8
of sio and life eternal for the sake of that one sacrifice of
Christ accomplished on the cross. *^f The next is, if possible,
even more emphatic in th^ avowal of this doctrine. Question
67, **• Are both word and sacrtiments then, ordained and ap-
pointed for this end, that they may direct our faith to the sacri-
fice of Christ upon the cross, as the alone ibundatioo of our
salvation?'* The. answer, is, "It is so. For the Holy Spirit
teaches us in the.Gospel^ aq^d asswr^a. u^.by tUe s^craii»ents»
that the. whole of our salvation ii€pends.npott that one sacrijiee
of Christ which he offered for us on the eross"% Here thea

1; 14), aesi dicerei^ juMificari noa vel alifnlvi eon^N? Doo, quia
lUa in Mtisfiictionefii reaponiiet"'— (9 sup* Q«#. XVII. Mct* 3f^i>

. ^**Qtlid eredis com dicn: Padiiia est? Uupj Euiii toio:<)uitfem
▼jtae suae tempore^ qao in terria egii, pva«eipite vara tfrajoa eitrMao,
iimm Dei advannia paoeatum anivarai generis ^Mma^iH^arfiora rt aa*-
ma auathMifiae^ ut auapaaaiona tan(|itamitnS<oaacrifieio piopidataii^
oorpua at aniniam naatram ab aaternn datniialiaiia liberarac, ec fi^^
gratiam Dei, justitism'et vitam aetcmaafi aeqaifefat.**

t ** Quid sunt sacramenta ? Heap, Sunt sacra et iu oculoa in cor-
rantia Hit^na et sigrlla, ob earn causam a Deo instituta, ut (ler ea nolijd
promissionem evangelli majis declnret el obsignet: quod acilicet non
uniterats tnntiim, veriim ettatn singiiHa credentibiia, propter iioicum
iHud Ohristi sacrificlum In cruce peracfcim, gratis donet remiwionem
peccatorum, etvitnin aetemain.*'

.I'^^iim ittrtKjno i^itur e.t v^n>uun at saafaipenU eo n^tfAsnU^

18380 Fhwo/ Ae, Early BBfamers4 499

it 18 most unequivocally declared that God bestows upon the
elect, not only pardon, but eternal life, and this not in conse-
quence of the active obedience of Christ, but ^' solely on ac-
count of that one sacrifice accomplisbed on the cross." The
same is likewise declared in Q^uestion 76, ^' What is it to eat
the crucified body, and drink the shed blood of Christ ? Ans.
It is not only to embrace with a believing heart all the sufFeiv^
ings and death of Christ, and thereby t<^ obtain pardon of sin,
and eternal life ; but besides this to become more and mora
united to his sacred body by the Holy Spirit," etc.* The same
doctrine is declared in several. other qp^stions and answers.

Here then, is the doctrine most unambiguously declared, and
in the Palative Catechism too, the text book of all the eafly
Calvinistic Churches after it was franied-^that we are justified^
and obtain eternal life by Chrisfs passive obedience ahae.-r^
Not one syllable is uttered about the '^ imputation of his activej
obedience."

The estimation in which this Catechism has e\*cr been hel4
by Calvinists, will show at once the. extent and overwhelming^
force of. its aulhority in -a question like .the one before us^i
Even the Synpd,of Dorty notwithstanding all the light that hs^
been , thrown upon the tbeology-^or the. j reformation b}'< thi^
refinements ^nd, innovati<yis of the Schoolrof (joraar^ yet det*.
olared titat ^'thq use of the.Ueideibetg. Catechisai should bO;
earnestly . continued in the churches of - th^ Reformaiiofi.^
inasmuch as it- contained, a truly accurate compendium q^
ttfthodox Chri$tian • doctrinL • prepared with exiraordinmry
msd<m."f , • \\ . , , '

fildem liostnim ad Mcrificiuht ChristI in cruce peractam, tfanqiiam' aii^
uniciim nostrae salutis -fiindftrnenttiin, dediicant ? Resp. Ita est.
Nam'Spiritus Sanctus docet evangelio et 'con(irmat satrarneiuis, ptn^
nem nostrain salutem positanri esse in unico sacrificio Christi pro no-
bte ih ortice oblaii.*'— Oiw»f«f. LXVH. ^

•• ^Qnfd est cniciflxtim corpus Christi ciHarey et fiisuih^tis sangiiT-.
nem biberc? 'Resp* Est non tdiitum totam pa&Vionem et n)orteni'
Ch'ristt, cermatiimi fiducia amplecti, ac per id remissjonem peccaio-'
rum et vitam aeternam adipisci : snd eftnm per Spirirum Sancfiim/'
qui sffool in CfcrwHo et iii nobis habitat, ita saeroiMfteM ejiii» cor][>ori
nMgia ae-migis^unlri^*' etc. , . - (|

f "Usus'Gtttechismi H^fdelbergensis in Ecclesiis reformat js,mo>*-
dieus t'ettneretUur ^\ becauser that, ^tidmodum accur^tuiti grthodoiae''
doctrinae Obfisttanae compendium sibgarari'prnddn^ia adornatum cbn-'^
iineret."-Lesfc XV. '(p;08VfcrtdfieAi.''(3«ferm.^^^^^

430 Views of the Early ReformerM. [Oct.

III. We shall next hear the venerable Virsinus. His riews
of this subject have been brouglit out in the first section of cbis
article, under the head of Justification, to which the reader is
referred, Vol. XL p. 459. We here add the following from
the same author.

On p. 914, of his explanation of the Catechism be says,
'* Our entire salvation is found in the suffering and death of
Christ."* On p. 215, "What did Christ suffer? By the
word suffering is understood his whole huiniliatioOy or the obe-
dience of his whole humiliation^ all his miseries, ' infirmities,
griefs, torments, to which Christ was obnoxious in body and soul
for our sake, from his birth mitil his death.^f

On p. 340, (in a passage too long to be here quoted,) he

E roves at length that the holiness of Christ's human nature, for
is active compliance with law,) was a necessary requisite for
him to become our Mediator. " In order that he roignt in our
stead J7er/brm obedience unto the death of the cross^ and make
satisfaction.^^ Such passages as the following are of perpetual
occurrence in his Explanation. " The washing of blood b the
forgiveness of sins, or justification for the sake of the shed
hlood of Christ." p. 375. " Justification which is by the
blood of Christ." ''The dominical supper testifies that the
sacrifice of Christ alone justifies." Chnst gives righteousness
and eternal life to his people, on account or his blood poured
out upon the cross."J For the shedding of blood completes
the satisfaction, so that it alone is called our righteousness.

Ursinus, was the writer of the Heidelberg Catechbm. If
then, there could be any doubt whether this doctrine be taught
in that symbol, that doubt can exist no longer. If any man

* ** In ejus passiohe et morte tota nostra salus coosiitic"-
Quaest 37. .

f ** Quid sU passus Christus t Nomina passianis intelligiiur UM
humiliaiio, fle^ obeflientia totiu0 hunniliatiooia, omnoa miseriae^ iafino-
itates, dolores, cruciatu's, ignpminiae, quibua Chrittut «b aniculo wt-
tivitatis ad horam usque mortis tarn anima, quam corpore, Doocia cao-
aa fuit obuox\\xB.'''--4d Qtiae^^ i^XXVlI.

f Ablutio aaiBgttiiiia est ^Qodonatio peccatorufBy aaa jnaiificatio
propter effusum aanguinem Cbristi.— Justifioaclo. quae ek aao^iae
CbristL-r-0.qeiia tesc^tiir, solum sacrificium Chrtsti justificave. — Cbris-
tiiB fidelibus suia donat justitiam et vitain aeternam propter aaogui-
nem suum in cruce fiffusum^-^Nam effusiosanguioisi eataatisfikctioim
complementunv: cideo tola diciHirJuatitia iiostnu" .

1838.] View of the Early Reformer^, 4« 1

could understaod what were the views advanced id that Cate-
cbism, Ursious was the man.

IV. Piscator is our next witness. He and Georgim Car^
giuSf with Abraham Sculietus, were some of the " virorum
magnoruvi" whose writings Dr, Gomar very oblij^ingly under-
tooK to correct, on the subject of justification. When tbe con*
tfoversj on this subject arose, he came out decidedly and de-
clared that " we are not justified by the active obedience of
Christ.''* And on Rom. 5: 1 9, he at once declares, that '^ tbe
active obedience, or holy life of Christ is never said to be im-
puted to us for righteousness, and that if we were justified by it
there would have been no necessity that Christ should die.^f
The following passages are found scattered about in his works :
'* To impute righteousness and to forgive sins are the same
thing." '* In respect to the formal cause of justification, I
teach that justification is nothing but the forgiveness of sins.''
" They for whom Christ died are unrighteous, 1 Pet. 3: 8, but
they to whom tbe active obedience of Christ is imputed are not
unrighteous ; therefore Christ did not die for those to whom his
active obedience is imputed. And by consequence he died in
vain." " The Scriptures never say that the active obedience
of Christ is imputed to us for righteousness." " These phrases,
to impute righteousness and to forgive sin, mean the same
thing." '' I admit that we should have that perfect obedience
to the law which is obtained by imputation. But I affirm that
this imputation is accomplished on account of Christ's passive
obedience." '' The law requires of us, either perfect obedience,
or punishment."^ These passages are sufficient to declare tbe
sentiments of this great divine*

* ** Obedientia Christ! activa non jiistificamur.'*

f " Sed baec [scil. obedientia activa, sive saneta Christi vita] nua-
<|uaiii nobis ad juctitiam ionputari dicitur : et si ilia justificati fuiaae-
iDUi^ noo easet opua ipsum morL"

t '^Imputare juatiliam, et remittare peccata ease idem. De caoaa
formali justificationia doceo ; juatificatioDein, oibH aliud eaae, qnam
reroiaaiooeiti peccatorum. — Pro quibus Cbristus mortiiua eat, UJi nnU
iqjuati, 1 Pet, 3: 8, tlli quibua imputatur obedientia Christi activa^
ChriaiUB mortuus non est. . £t |>er conaequens, friistra est mortuiis.**-
Scripturam nusquam tnidere, nobis ad jualitiam, imputari obedien-
tjam Christi activam.— Locutiones istae imputare justitiam, et remit-
tere peccata, aequipollent — hex enim a oobif poetulat aut perfectam
obedientiam, aut poeoam." The two following are from Cargw§

489 Views of the Early lUformerg. [Oct.

V.' The Betgie Confession. We had Yiot the original of
this Confession by us when we referred to it under a ibrmer
topic ; but we shall now present the reader with an eitnct
from Art. 23, referring him to the margin for the Latin. "We
rest entirely upon the alone obedience of Jesus Christ crocBed
upon the cross. That obedience becomes truly oars when ve
believe in iiim. Moreover, that obedience alone abundantly
suffices for covering all oar iniquities; and also for rendering us
safe and secure against all temptations." " We believe that
our entire happiness consists hi the forgiveness of sins which is
in Christ Jesus." ^' And that in thid alone is contained oor
entire righteousness before God."*

It is really humiliating to see a man possessing the splendid
genius and acquisitions of the venerable Gomar, descend to the
wretched evasion which he adopts in relation to this Confesnoo.
In one of his treatises he takes occasion to refer to the 6ct that
this synibol of the Belgic Church contradicted the views
which lie had adopted, of the doctrine of justification.

This was, as may be supposed, a most tender spot for him to
touch upon ; and. accordingly, he endeavours to evade the ob-
jection by the ridiculous supposition that the Confession roist
have been corrupted ! Though it w»as originally published la
the Harmony, and in the Body and Syntagma of Confessions
just as I have given it. And even in the wretchedly translated
and miserably mutilated edition of the Harmony, recently fwb-
lislied in America, and out of which every thing was left that
the editors dared to leave out pertaining to the passive obeifi-
ence of Christ, the passage remains just as we have given it,
retaining still all the "corruptions" alleged to exist by Dr.
Gomar. To such lengths will even the best of naen p ^
support of a theory when once they have set their heart upon

above referred to. " Legpm, ant ad olieftiencimn, aul ail poeniim, ik«
ad utnimqtie, ohiigare. — Quod Clirtetufl^ pro nobis pniesiitft, nd id
prae0Uindiim> noa non oliIigiirh"'-/>e cwrneuio mtat^dbrahismiSaM:
and Pise, Apol* pro Disp,

• ''Boirt Jesu Christi crueifixi obedlentia anffuiti, id en prorsaSH-
qnie8<itmua : quae qiiidem nostra^ eat, euio in euro creHitiitta* ^^
porro rinn abnnde siiffirtt ad otnnea iiiiqiiitates noatras obtegendfl^ ion
etinin ad nos tutos seci^rosqiie reddendos, adveraua omaes tenlJitiooe&
— Creditnus omnem fetfcitatem noatram sitam esae, in peccatorum re*
ifiMatone, quae est in Cbriato Jean : — Uoica, tofam nostrsoi jo^''^
coram Deo, contineri."

1638.] Viem of the Early Reformen. 433

it. And thus would Gomar after having corrected the ^< erron^*
of the *^ great men" of the reformation, even venture to correct
the confessions themselves ; and tlius prescribe for the ortho-
doxy of Christendom.

VI. Our next witness is Dr. Pareus, (born A. D. 1549).
His views on this subject were partially expressed in the quo-
tations from him which we made under a former topic*

We now add the following. To the query " whether the
passive righteousness of Christ is alone imputed to us for right-
eousness, or whether the active likewise," he unhesitatingly
answers "the passive alone is imputed." " Scripture declares
that the entire material of our righteousness, is in the suffering,
cross, blood, and death of Christ : therefore this alone is that
on account of which we are jtistified.^^ " The Scripture de-
fines our whole justi6cation by the forgiveness of sin, on ac-
count of the blood of Christ : Therefore the pouring out of his
blood is that by the imputation of which we are justified ; and
the forgiveness of sins is our whole justification." " Never have
I read in the sacred Scriptures that our righteousness consists of
two or three parts. Never have I read that the human sanctity
of Christ imputed to us, is our righteousness, or even a part of
it. If any one reads such a passage, I entreat that he will show
it to me, that- 1 also may read and believe. Never have I read
this, of even his actual obedience."f

In the following passage, (which is the last we shall quote
from Pareus), he enters into an interesting explanation of this
view. His words are, *^ The rigliteousness of the person, and
the righteousness of the merit of Christ, as they ought not to be
divided, so neither ought they to be confounded in justification.
The reason is, because the Scripture itself distinguishes between
the quality of the person of the Mediator meriting righteousness

• See Vol. XI. p. 463, etc.

f ^ Scripttira nostrae justitiae totnm moteriam ostendit in panione^
cruce, sanguine, morte Christi : Ergo haec sola est res propter quam
jiistificamur. — Scripture totam jiistificationem nostram definit remis-
•ione peccatorum propter sanguinem Christi : ergo sola ctanguinia eA
fiisio est Id cujtis infiputatione justificariiiir : et remisaio peccatorum
est tota nostra justificatio. — Nusquam S. Scripturas sic tripartiri aut
hipartiri justitiam nostram. Nusqiinin legi, sancUtAtem humanam
Christi nobis impiitari, esse justitiam nostram, vel ejus partem. Si
quia legit, quaeso mi hi ostendat, ut et ego legam et credain. Nwh
quam etiam id lego de actuali obedientia."

Vol. XII. No. 32. 55

434 Vieuf$ of the Early Reformer*. [Oct.

for us and the merit or righteousoess itself, as betwecD^
and latter, or, as between cause and efiect. As in Isaiah 58:
1 1, my righteous servant. Heb. 7: S6, Such an high priest be-
came us, who etc. 2 Cor. 5: 20, Him who knew no sin, ete.
1 Pet. 3: 18, Christ once suffered the jost for the unjust, etc
In these, and jn similar places there is ascribed to Christ a tvcn
fold righteousness ; one, by which he himself was adorned ; the
other which he bestows upon us. When thb distinction bn^-
lected, much confusion follows, and it involves the doctrine in
so many disadvantages, that it is extremely difficult to defend
it against the papists and its other adversaries."*

VII. Dr, Amandus Folanus. This is a divine, to whose
testimony for several reasons, we invite special attention.')' In
solid learning he has been rarely surpassed : and with the re-
formed church his authority was considerable. Although per-
petually quoted and referred to by both friends and foes, be has
never yet been spoken of slightingly. Another consideratioa
that entitles him to attention is, he wrote his System of Theolo-
gy after the disputes on justification and the obedience of Christ
bad entered the church, and he took the side opposite to Ursi-
nus, Piscator, etc. In his System of Theology above quoted,

* ** Justitia pemonae^et juatitia meriti Cbristi, ut oon debent divcUii
ita nee dehent confuodi, Bed distiiigui in juttificationo. Batio est :
quia Scriptiira ipsa distinguit inter qtialitatem personac mediatoris
merentis nobis justitiam et merituro, vel justitiam ip8am,Manqoain in-
ter prius et posterius, iino tanqtiam inter causam et eiTectum : ut Je-
aai. 53: 11» ^Servus meus juRtus ;' Heb. 7: 26, * Talis nobis convenie-
bat poniifex qui,' etc. : 2 Cor. 5: 20, ^ Eom qui non novit peecatom,*
etc. ; 1 Petr. 3: 18, * Chriatua aemel paasna eat jastna pro inju8(ii^' elcL
Hia et similihua locia tribuitur Cbristo duplex juatiita, quaf^i duplex
veatia : una qua ipae ornatua fuit, altera quaiti nobis donat. Hk dia-
tinctione neglecta, multiplex confusio sequitur, et plurimns iocomuo-
dis implicatur haee doctrina, ut difficilius contra Papiatas et alkie ad-
versarios defendatur."

f Polanus is one of the few theologians who have framed a corofkle
system oftheology originally from the Bible. He l^gan lib immi
Syntagma by diligently reading through the Hebrew and Greek
giuals ; and carefully noting and arranging the various topics in their
order. He obtained what helps he could, in the ehicidation of ofaecvra
passages ; and then by showing that the doctrines of the Scri|»tuit^
of the reformed church, and of the primitive church are tbe aama^
bia stupendous efforts resulteil in tbe production of ibe work freai
which we quote above.

1838.] Viewt of the Early Refmnm. 435

be thus speaks io relation to the topic before us : ^' That perfect
obedience which the law requires, does not consist in action
only, but it is the conibrmity of our whole nature, and of all our
actions, affections, and sufferings, with the law of God. If the
Son of God suffered and died for us, then surely there has been
a most sufficient satisfaction for us, and we are in the fullest
manner redeemed, and cleaused from sin. The effects of the
death of Christ are^ 1. Our reconciliation with Gody Rotn. 5:
10. 2. Liberty from the servitude of sin, death, and the devil :
and liberty of entering the celestial holy of holies, by that new
and living way which Christ consecrated for us Uirough the
vail, that is, through his flesh, John 8: 32, 36. Heb. 10: 19. 20.
The sufieripg and death of the whole human nature of Christ,
that is, the suffering and death, internal and external, of body
and soul, is the most perfect satisfaction, and of infinite value."*
Then, in speaking to the point whether Christ endured suffer*
ing in soul and body, be takes up and considers the following
question : ^* If Christ suffered and died, not only in the body
corporeally, but also in spirit spiritually, why then does the
Scripture attribute our entire salvation to the blood and death
of Christ corporeally J as in Rom. 3: 25, Eph. 1: 7, etc. To
this I reply that the Scriptures when they attribute our whole
salvation to the blood and death of Christ corporeally, speak
synecdochicallj ; naming a part for the whole. Ascribing it to
tnat part which is most conspicuous, and roost evident to the
sight; that they may accommodate themselves to the vulgar;
who are more easily impressed by what they see, than by what
is made evident by ratiocination. Thus in the history of the
creation of the world, visible creatiures only are expressly de-

* ^'Obedientia peHectii, quam lex requirit, non est tan turn actio,
•ed etiam conibrmitas totius naturae et omnium action um, affectuiim,
pasnonumque cum lege Dei, p. 1 173. Si Filiua Dei pro nobis passua
et mortuua eat, turn profeoto aufficientiaaime pro nobia aatiafSictiim,
et noa pleniaaime redempti et emendati a peccato aumita, p. 1234.
llortia effiMsta Chriati aunt i 1. Reconciliatto noairi cum Deo, Rom. 5s
10. — Si. Libertaa a aervitute peccati, mortia et diaboli, et libertaa in-
grediendi aacrarium coeleate ea via, qunm Cbriatua dedicavit nobis
recentem et vivam per velum, boo eac per camem suam. Job. 8: 33^
36. Heb. 10: 19, 90, etc. p. 1264.— Paaaio et mora totiua bumanae nar
turae Chriati, boc eat, paaaio et mora externa et interna, corporia et
aniroae Chriati, eat aatiafiustio Ilia perfectiaBima aique infiniti pretii, p«
1268."

436 Viewt of the Early Rtformen. [Ocr«

scribed ; though it is certain that invisible creatures, were also
then produced. So also in the places adduced above ; the ex-
ternal and corporeal sufferings and death of Christ are spoken
of: Not that his internal and spiritual suffering is excluded,
but because his external and c-orporeal is much more apparent :"
etc. p. 1S71.* Here then Pdanus asserts that ourwhole salva-
tion is attributable to the passive obedience of Christ; and
though not to the body and blood corporeally, yet to the suffer-
ings of soul and body really.

While considering the following passages the reader will bear
in mind that Polanus declares justification to be " a release from
obligation to suffer punishment." ^' We were reconciled to God
by the death of Christ while we were strangers and enemies by
wicked works. — For the reprobate even, did Christ die as to
the procuring of a sufficiency for their salvation. For the de^h
of Christ is an expiation sufficient also for the reprobate, yea,
even for a hundred thousand worlds, if they all would believe.
So great is its value. But as to the efficacy of his death, he
did not die for the reprobate. — ^AU the sins of the elect, com-
mitted from the beginning of the world even until the end of it,
are expiated by the blood of Christ. And for his sake are
forgiven by God to those who believe.'^f

* "Si Christum uon tantum cerpore corporaliter, sed eiiam anifna
apiritualiter passus et mortuus est : ciir igitur Scriptuni totam salutero
nostram trihuant snnguini et niorti Christi corporali ? Rom. 3: 23.
Eph. 1: 7. Col. 1: 20. Heh. 9: 12 et seq. 1 Pet. 1: 18, 19. 1 John
1: 7. Apoc. 1: 5 et 5: 9. Rom. 5: 10. Phil. 2: 8. Respond, Scriptarae
quae totam salutem nostram iribuunt aanguini et morti eorporaii
Christi, synecdochic^ loquuutitr, partem pro toto nominanteey ec quod
est totiufi, tribjientea parci maxime conapicuae et ia oculis iDcurreDCi,
ut ae accominodent cnptui etiam infirinorum, qui iaciliua ea quae
oculis videntur cognoscunt, quara quae ratioeinatione sunt perecni-
tanda. Sicut in hiatoria creatiooia ratmdt desoribuiuiir expreaae tan-
turn visibilea creaturae, quum certum siii eliam iuvisi biles creatania
turn productas fuisse. — lui qiioque In locia adductis externa atqiie
corporalis passio et moraCliristi inculcntiin non quod interna et
spiritualis excludatur, scd turn quia externa atque corporalia maxime
evidens fuit."

f **Per mortem Christi reeonoiliati fuimiis Deo, cum abnlieneti et
hostea essemus, cum mente operibua malis inteoti casemna.*' p. t276L
^ Proreprobisetiain Cbristtm eat mortuus, nimirum quoad 8ufficientjai».
Nam mors Cbristi easct itr^oy aufficiens etiain pro reprobia, tnio pro
centies millo mundis, si ouines crederent : tmuae est dignttatis.

1838.] Viewt of the Early Reformers. 437

Although when the discussion of this subject entered ttie
reformed churches Polanus was inclined to take, (and ultimately
in his Syntagma did take^ the ground opposite to that occupied
by Piscator, Ursinus, ana all the primitive reformers ; yet take
notice how very carefully he expresses his views in the sub-
joined passages lest he should be accused of having really and
entirely abandoned, on this point, the doctrine of the reforma-
tion. He sees, that such a charge could be with reason, pre-
ferred ; and he endeavors to guard against the suspicion.
The reader will be struck with the contrast between the views
of this doctrine that he here advances, and those now affirmed
to be orthodox. " The righteousness of Christ," says be, " by
which we are justified, far exceeds, and excels in comparison
that eternal life which is given to us by God. That we are
justified by the payment made by Christ in our stead, of the
punishment due to us, is not called into doubt. In the reform-
ed churches this is agreed upon. Therefore there is no need
of proving it. For if a hundred thousand testimonies were
produced, which taught that we are justified by the blood of
Christ, that we have forgiveness of sin by the blood of Christy
it would be useless to us, for we also embrace this sentiment
from our soul.'' Polanus would never have taken all this pains
to exculpate himself from the suspicion of having departed from
the primitive view of the Reformation on this subject, unless he
had been aware that his refinements had afforded some ground
for indulging it. We meet with no such disclaimers in the
writings of Urslnus, Parens, Tilenus, Piscator, etc. though we
meet them in abundance in the writings of Polanus and Gomar.
The quotation continues as follows : <' To all this, we yet add,
that Christ could not have been our righteousness, unless be
had suffered and died for us. For by the work of suffering and
dying he finished the work of redemption for us ; as our
righteousness consists, in the most perfect fulfilment of the
commands of the law, and particularly in his suffering and
death, in our stead, which is the seal and crown of the whole
obedience. We hesitate not to say with blessed Athanasius : It
was not in the law that Christ overcame the devil and his
angels, neither was it there that he wrought out our salvation.

Quoad efficaciam vero non est mortuus pro reprobis." p. ]Q94.
** Omnia enim peccata electorum inde ab initio mundi commissa, et
asque ad finem mundi committenda, sunt expiata sanguine Chriati, et
propter eum credentibua a Deo remiaaa." p. 1301.

4S8 VUwt of the Early Reformers. [Oct.

i

but it was upon tbe cross." ^' For without the obedieooe ac-
complished on the cross, the fulfilment of tbe commands of tbe
law would have profited us nothing. Seeing that we were
obligated to obedience, and also to punishnaent, on aooouot of
our transgressions."*

Here then is a writer, who, when the dispute on this subjeel
commenced, took the contrary side to the generality of Calnn-
ists, and yet has actually gone further towards denyiog the
imputation of Christ's active obedience for jtistificatioD, thin
have those brethren among us who have been loudly ceosured
as unsound Calvinists. It is quite apparent, in the light of tbe
testimony which we have thus far cited, that these brethien,
(agreeably to what has latterly been denominated soaod doe-
trine,) are more orthodox than the reformers tbemselres.f It

Justitia Chrieti per quara nos justificamur, proportiooe looge
BUperat et excellit vitam aeternam, quae nobia a Deo detar, Q»od
persolutioDe poenae a Chrieto loco nostro facta coram Deo jintifiee-
mur, noD vocatur in dubium, aed in Ecclesiis reformatia de eo oon-
aentitur : proinde nulla opus habet protuitione : ac ai oenttes m\h
teatimoDia extarent, quae docerent, nos sanguine Cbristi jimifieaiv
nos remissionem peccatonim habere in sanguine Chrisd,taniaid pt-
tiua nobis easet: nam et noe hoc ipaum ex animo aroplectiiiior'
Quinetiam hoc addiroas: Cbriatnm non potuiase ease jusutiaoi iks-
tram, nisi pro nobis paasua et mortuus esseL Patiendo enim et ID0^
iendo opus redemption is nostrae com pie vit: sicutju8titiaoo8tra,etiB
mandatorum legis impletione perfectissima et praecipue io puaoM
et morte pro nobis obita, quae totius obedientiae coronia atque oUig-
natio est, consistat. Unde non dubitamus dicere cum b. A^itntao
libro Q^Jaestionum ad Antiochum Principem^ reafmna. ad QoaesLSB.
p. 385. torn. II. edit. Commelin.: < Non in lege Chriatus diaboliio
evacuavit et daemonaa, neque in ea aalutem operatua est, aed in cM
Quia abaque obedientia in cmce praestita. Nihil nobis profuaNt
mandatorum legis impletio : quum non tan turn ad implenda o'''|^
legis, verum etiam ad poenam ab ejus tranagressionem fuerimos oU-
gati." p. 1470.

t That this may be at once apparent, we beg leave here to aobjo*
a passage from Mr. Barnes's Defence, p. 257. Dr. Jankio cooaiden uui
language itself as sustaining his charge. * Vindication,* p^ 1^
have uniformly represented," aays Mr. Barnes, ** the dectrioe aanttj
as possible in the language of the Scriptures : that it was by hia Um
his obedience unto death, his merits, bis atoning sacrifice, hn »i«^
tuted sufferings, his work alone, that man could be justified aod »r^
I have always taught that men have no merits by natur»i tbtf W
have done noth]ng,.and ean dojiothing^ to deaarre eteinal liftt *"*

1888.] Viem of the Early Reformert. 439

would be n curious inquiry, (tbou^h we shall not now institute
it,) what would become of the Keforniei-s themselves if they
were now alive ?

VIII. Even Dr. Oamar^ who, in relation to the active
obedience, took still higher ground than Polanus yet agrees sub-
stantially with the brethren referred to, as may be seen by the
following passages, taken somewhat at random from his works:
** The obedience of Christ by which we are righteous, and by
which we are justified by God, that is, by which we are de-
clared just, is not only a particular obedience performed in
punishment due to us on account of sin ; but the univer-
sal obedience of the whole law. Whence it also follows that
tbe forgiveness of our sins, (understood without synecdoche,)
that is absolution of the punishment due for our sins, because of
tbe satisfaction of the suffering and death of Christ in our be-
half, imputed to us by faith, is not the whole of our justification
necessary for obtaining life eternal. But that the whole
righteousness of the law, performed for us by Christ, is also
necessary to obtain righteousness and eternal life." '^The
suffering and obedience of Christ from the beginning even until
the end of it unite in one ; and although the completion of the
suffering placed in the article death, occupies the last place, in
the order of time^yet in the order of justification the forgive-
ness of sins precedes ; but the imputation of the righteousness
of perfect obedience succeeds, because it implies the forgiveness
of sins. Notwithstanding however, although they differ in the
order, they are both accomplished at the same time by God in
justification."*

they are lost, and hopeless, end ruined ; and that if ever saved it muat
be by the merits of the Lord Jesus Christ alone. And that this has
been the strain of my preaching, I may appeal boldly to all Who have
ever heard me, and to all my writings. No man ever heard me niter
a sentiment in the pulpit, or elsewhere, that contravened this great
central truth of Christianity. The charge, therefore, that I have i/e-
nied that the ''active obedience of Christ is imputed,'' etc. is wholly
gratuitous and unfounded. It is neither contained in the passages
quoted by the prosecutor from tny book, nor is it to t>e found any
where in what I have said or written."

* ** Quare obedientia Christi, qua justi sumus, et a Deo justiHeamur,
id est, justi judicamur, non est tantum oliedientia particniaris, in poe*
na nobis debits, ob peccatum perferenda ; sed universalis tottus legis
obedientia. Unde etiam sequitur, reoiissioneiu peccatorum nQstroruiDt
sine synecdoche, acceptam, id est, poeuaa pro peccatis nosuris debitat

440 VictDt of the Early Refarmen. [Oct.

IX. The following is the testimony of the Moravian Coa-
fession. *' We obtain pardon of sins and are made rigbteoos
before God, by grace, for Christ's sake, through faith, etenif
believing that Christ hath suffered for us." Here it b asseited
that we obtain pardon and righteousness not by believing tint
Christ fulfilled the law for us by " active obedience," but "b^
believing that he suffered for us ;" bis passive obedieooe.
Art. IV.

X. Sjfnod of Dort. Art. XXI. We now present the reader
with the judgment of this famous Calvinistic Synod on the
subject ; and upwards of Jifty years after the dispute was fiist
agitated. It is deserving of especial notice, that though this
article professes to state in detail, what Cfarist has done (at bis
people, it yet never once alludes to his active obedience is
having been performed for us. The following b the whole
article.

" We believe that Jesus Christ is ordained with an oath to be
an everlasting High Priest, after the order of Melchisedek.
Who hath presented himself in our behalf before bis Father, to
appease his wratli by his full satisfaction, by offering himseiroo
the tree of the cross, and pouring out his precious blood to
purge away our sins ; as the prophet had foretold. For it is
written, He was wounded for our transgressions, he was braised
for our iniquities ; the chastisement of our peace was upon him;
and with his stripes we are healed ; He was brought as a lamb
to the slaughter, and numbered with the transgressors ; and
condemned by JPontius Pilate as a malefactor, though be bad
first declared him innocent. Tlierefore, he restored that which
he took not away, and suffered the just for the unjust, as well
in his body as soul, feeling the terrible punisbmeot that our
sins had merited ; insomuch that his sweat became like onto
drops of blood falling on the ground. He called out, roy G<i^

nl»8olutioiietYi, ob Christi pro nobis paasi et mortui satisfactioneaii per
iidetn nobis imputatam, non esse totam justificatioaem, nd riniai ae-
terrtann consequendam \ necessariam : sed etiam universalem leg*
a Christo pro nobis praestitam justitiam, ad justitiam el vittni aeitf*
nam esse neeessariurn. — Christi passionem, et ol>edieDtiam, ab ioiuo
vitae ad mortem usque, coiivenisse, ac liret passionia compleraeotoiBf
in morte poeitum, postremum tempore occu|)et locum, in ordine tan««
justification rs, remisaio peccatorum praecedit : impulaiio vero obedi-
entiae jiiatitiae porfectae auccedit ; quia ea remiasioDeni peccntprva
Bupfionit, ut in ^ue objectionia dictum. Utruraque tamen, licel ordflM}
di^erant, aimul, a Deo justifieante, peraifitur.**

1838:] Views of the Early Refarmert. 441 ^

my God, why hast thou forsaken me ? And hath suffered all
this for the remission of our sins — wherefore we justly say with
the apostle Paul, that we know nothing but Jesus Christ and
him crucified ; we count all things but loss and dung for the
excellency of the knowledge of Jesus Christ our Lord ; in
whose wounds we find all manner of consolation. Neither is it
necessary to seek or to invent any other meam of being reconr
died to Gody than this only saaifice, once offeredy by which
believers are made perfect forever. This is also the reason
why he was called by the angel of God, Jesus^ that is to say,
SavioWy because he should save his people from their sins."

The sentence which we have put in Italic was evidently
pointed directly at those who were at that time distracting and
perplexing the church with '^ inventing another means of being
reconciled to Grod — ^and made perfect forever," than " this only
sacrifice." That new invention of being *^ made perfect," was
the active obedience scheme.

XL TXlenus is our next witness.

The reader will have observed how expressly this writer in
bis testimony adduced by us under the first topic,* of this article,
avows the doctrine here under consideration. We shall present
from his admirable Syntagma of christian doctrine, a few addi-
tional quotations.

On pp. 723, 724, he thus speaks : " Thus far we have treat-
ed upon the efiicient cause of justification. The object of it,
when understood positively, is the making known of the glory
of God, which shines forth in that most wise mingling and tem-
pering of justice and mercy : For what justice requires of the
Son as our surety, is by mercy imputed to us. Thus have we
spoken of the efficient cause and end of justification. Now we
shall offer a few things concerning its material and form ; and
vindicate it from tlie sophistry and abuses of our adversa-
ries. The material of justification understood actively, is the
satisfaction accomplished by Jesus Christ whom God hath set
forth that he might be a propitiation through faith in his blood,
to declare his righteousness by the remission of sins, Rom. 3:
25; by which words the apostle intends to signify that our
faith looks especially upon the sacrifice of Christ. This re-
demption is beheld not only in the death of the cross, although
in this last act, and completion of the satisfaction, the Scripture

* See Vol. XI. p. 470 etc.
Vol.. XII. No. 32. 56

442 Viem of the Early Befarmert. (Oct.

places it synecdocbically : But it also appears in the preced-
ing miseries and sorrows which from the tieginning of his incar-
nation until his death, our surety suffered for us. The fom
of justification actively taken is the forgiveness of sins, and im-
putation of righteousness, which Christ, by his obedience even
unto the death of the cross, performed for the Father, reserved
for us, and applied to us by faith. But when justification bud-
derstood passively, its form is nothing but the applicatioD of
faith : whence faith is called our righteousness. To the elect,
therefore, when they are justified, all their sins of omissioa ua
forgiven as well as those commonly called sins of commisaoo.
This is certain. And therefore be whose sins are foigivea, ap-
pears before God, as if be bad done no evil which the lawfolr-
bids, and had left undone no duty which the law coromaods:
which certainly is a perfect^ andy in all its parity an oboAite
righteousneiiy in the divine estimation. And to every onetlnis
forgiven, the reward of eternal life is just as certain, as that the
promise is true which says : Do this and live." And on page
1065, he thus speaks : '^ To forgive sins, to absolve from sins,
to impute righteousness, not to impute sins, are not diverse parts
of the benefit of justification, but denote only the various tenns
by which this act is expressed : Even as by the same act black-
ness is removed, and whiteness coated over a wall. Thus by
the same act of judgment sin is forgiven, and righteousness iiD-
puted to man."*

* *^ HactemuB de efficiente juatificationia. Finis ejus, cum adiva
aumitur, eat patefactto gloriae Dei, quae in aapientiaairoa ilia jiiatime^
et miaericordiae xgaan ac temperamento elucet. Nam quod a filiO|
tanquam a aponaore noatro exigtt juacitia : hoc nobia impuuvit mise-
ricordia. — Dictum eat de juatificatione efficiente, et fine. None
ejuadem materia et forma paucia declaranda, et ac adveraarioruiD
atrophia et fraudibua eat vindicanda. Materia juatifieationis acTiie
aumptae, eat aatiafactio praestita per Cbriatum quern Deoa propoauiti
ut easet IXaaniQiov per fidem Id sanguine ipaiua, ad deelaraodam joa-
titiam auam, per remiaaionem peccatorum, Rom. 3: 25, quiboa ToUa
apoatolua aignificat, fidem noatram aacrificium Cbriati potiaaiinani io-
tueri. Haec anolvrgwr^g spectanda eat non aolum in morte cnici^
quamvia in hoc ultimo actu, et aatisftictionia complemento, acriptaia
earn collocet aynecdochiae ; aed etiam in antegreaaia miaeriia et ae-
rumtiia, quae jam inde a primordio incamationta, noatra causa perpea-
aua eat aponaor noater. — Forma juatifieationis active aumptae, eat ra-
mi»io peccatorum, et imputatio juatitiae, quam Chriatna obediaocii
■ua, Patri usque ad mortem crucia praestita, nobia peperit, ac na^

IStSJ] VUmof the Early Ref»rmer9. 443

The reader caanot bat be imt>ressed with the striking simi-
larity existing in the language, and in the modes of explanation
adopted by all these venerable men on the first and last topics
which are the subjfct of this article. It proclaims how won*
derful the harmony must have been, in the sentiments enter-
tained by all the primitive reformers on the doctrine of justifi-
cation by faith in Christ.

Upon the nature of the foregoing quotations we deem it
altogether unnecessary to detain the reader by a single addition-
al remark, [t might be expected that we should here close
this protracted catalogue of authorities. But we beg to be in-
dulged in bringing forward one more. Several reasons conspire
to lead us to do so. The author's name has ever been an
honored one with the followers of Calvin ; he wrote at a period
later than any whom we have quoted on this point.* He
allows the distinction between the passive and active obedience
of Christ ; and) (what may be thought very singular,) he takes
up and fully answers all the leading arguments, which, in our
day are urged, and insbted on in defence of the imputation of
Christ's active obedience to the elect ; and in like manner dis-
poses of all the objections urged against the imputation of the
passive obedience alone. The reader will have observed, that,
to some extent, this has been done in the preceding quotations.
But here it is done more at length.

XII. Wendeline is the author referred to. In the first
book of his Christian Theology y Chap. XXV. page 576—^1,
we meet with the following: '' Thus far have we treated upon

perfidem applicat Passive cum sumitur justificatio, forma ejus nihil
aliud eBt,quam fidei applicatio, unde fides dicitur justitia nostra. — Cum
igitur electis, qui justificantur, omnia peccaUi remittantur, tarn ista,
quae omisstonis, quam ilia, quae commissionis vulgo vocantur, remitti,
certum est. Ac proinde is cai remissa sunt peccata, non solum eo
loco faabetur coram Deo, ac nihil mail, quod lex vetat, commisisset,
sed eliam, ac si nihil boni, quod lex iniperat, omisisset: quae cette
perfects, et oumibus numeris absoluta est justitia, aestimatione dtvioa,
cuique tam certo tribuitur vitae aeternae praemiuoi, quam vera est
haec promissio : Hoc fac, et vivos. — Remittere peccata, absolvere a
peccatis, imputare justitiam, non imputare peccata, non diversas hu-
jus beneficii partes, sed di versos duntaxat terminos hujus actus deno-
tant. Nempe ut eodem actu tollitur nigredo, et albedo aspergitur pa-
rieti : sic eodem judicio, et peccatum remittitur, et justitia bomini
imputatur.''

* HmSywUm qf Theology was published A. D. 1^

444 Views of the Early Refarmen. [Oct.

tbe efficient of jastificatioD. Its material is usually called dm,
hyy and on account ofwhich^ we are before the divine tribaoil
absolved from the curse of the law, and accounted rigbteoiis
and innocent. It is the perfect jsatisfaction of Christ for as;
by which the punishment due to us on account of sin, he him-
self sufiered in our stead. It is sometimes called the righteous-
ness and passive obedience of Christ.

^' But in order to explain this yet more clearly, I remark,

I. That when we call the satisfaction of Christ, the material d
our justification, we use the common language in relation to it.
But it is sometimes rightly called the meriiorums cause of oor
justification ; forasmuch as it is on account of this imputed, that
we are accounted righteous, and freed from the curse of tbe
law. But in another respect the merit of Christ is tbe cause
of our efiectual calling and justification. For it is the cause of
such calling, absolutely considered, inasmuch as it precedes
faith. It is also the cause of justification, respectively consider-
ed, that is, with respect to faith ; because we are not justified
by the merit of Christ, unless it be apprehended by faith.

II. " But hwe it is to be observed, that there is a twofold
obedience of Christ, active and passive. The active obedience
is that by which Christ spent his life in conformity to the law
of God, perfectly observing all its commandments ; whence It
is said there was no guile in him. Is. 53: 9, that be knew do
sin, 2 Cor. 5: 21. He did no sin, 1 Pet. 2: 22. He was templ-
ed in all points without sin, Heb. 4: 15. The passive obedience
is that by which he sustained for us the curse of the law to
which we were obnoxious on account of sin. This was by
suffering and dying for us, and therefore by enduring tbe pun-
ishment in our stead. Whence Paul says Christ redeemed us
from the curse of the law, when he was made a curse for us,
Gal. 3: 13.

III. '' Both these obediences of Christ are essentially ne-
cessary to our redemption and justification, yet not in tbessme
manner ; from each of them life redounds unto us, but not in the
same mode. For the active obedience is the condition re-
quired in the Mediator, without which Christ could not have
been our Mediator ; and without which, his death could have
availed us nothing. In the mean lime, however, this obedience
if we speak properly and accurately, is not a material of our
justification, nor is it imputed to us so as to be accounted ouftt
and on account of which our sins are forgiven, and ibedaiius

1838,] Views of the Early Refirmers. 445

of the law against us, satisfied ; in like manner as the passive
becomes ours hj imputation, and for which, sins are remitted to
us ; and the claims of the law satisfied. This is proved thus :

(1 .) ^^ Christ, so far as be was man, owed his active obedience
to the law for himself; for every creature is bound to obey his
Creator. And should God privilege any man to conduct him-
self disorderly, he would thereby overturn the order of his
righteousness, as the scholastics teach. Therefore that obedi-
ence is not imputed to us. The reason of the consequence is
sought d pari ; forasmuch as it is plain that if Christ was ob-
ligated to the law to die for himself, and if he did die under
these circumstances, he could not have imputed that to us, nor
could he have released us by it.

^* But it is objected, that Christ was made man not for him-
self, but for us ; therefore it was not for himself, but for us, that
is in our stead, that he performed the active obedience to the
law. To this I answer 1. That the antecedent is ambiguous.
If you mean that Christ was made man for us, that is, for our
good, it is admitted : But if you mean that he was made man
in our slead, it is denied. Because, what Christ was made,
and did in our stead, we are not obligated to do or to be. Even
as be was made a curse for us, lest we should become an ever-
lasting curse. But by bis incarnation Christ did not accomplish
this ; viz. that we should no longer be men, or be bound to act
agreeably to human nature. 2. The consequence is denied.
For even if Christ was made roan, not for himself but for our
benefit ; yet, after he became man he was a man by himself,
and therefore by himself and for himself, obnoxious to the law,
as man. In the same manner as he was obnoxious to corruption
after he had assumed a body. He also for himself had need of
food, drink, rest, etc.

(2.) '' If Christ performed active obedience in our stead, so
that it is imputed to us for righteousness, we are no longer
obliged to perform active obedience to the law. But the con-
sequence is false, and therefore the antecedent likewise. The
reason of the connection is likewise sought apart. Forasmuch
as we are not obligated to sufier eternal death, because Christ
sufifered the penalty in our stead. But some persons object to
this and say that the active obedience performed by Christ for
us, is the cause of roeritmg eternal life ; and that we are no lon-
ger obliged to the obedience of the law on this account. But
we deny that the came of deserving eternal life, is the active
obedience of Christ performed in our stead. The reason \s.

446 Viewi of the Early Reformen. [Oct.

because^ that as a creature he owed it simply fi>r himself: fcrit
was not possible be should be from under tbe law. Andtheie-
fore by it there is nothing of desert flows to us : nor could thoe
be, even if he had performed it, intending thereby our greiiest
good.

^' Those who say, that through the acUve obedience of
Christ we are no longer obligated to a rigid and exact obedi-
ence, can hardly reconcile their sentiment with the truth. For
if we are no longer obligated to the exact obedience of the law,
then, we should not sin by neglecting it, or ceasing to obey it,
which is false. We are therefore bound to obey it eDtiidj;
and our defections are forgiven because of the imputed-Mt
active but — -passive obedience of Christ the Mediator. And bjf
degrees he perfects sanctification, which the Mediator oierited
also*by bis suiSering.

(3.) '' Everywhere the Scripture, when it speaks of jostifc^
tion and our cleansing from sin, and of its forgiveness, nalus
mention not of the active, but of the passive obedieoce of
Christ. Among other testimonies of Scripture the foUowiog
are distinguished passages. — h. 53: 5, 6, 3y the bruise of the
Messiah we are healed. God hath laid on him the iniquities of
us all. Rom. 3: 24, 25, We are all justified by grace, by hii
grace, through the redemption accomplished in CbrisC Jeso,
whom God hath set forth, that he might be a propttiatioi
through faith in his blood. Rom. 5: 9, Beins justiiSed b/b
blood, much more shall we now be saved from wrath ; oi
verse 10, We have been reconciled to God by the death of w
Son. Gal. 3: 13, Christ redeemed us from the curse of the lav
when he was made a curse for us. 1 John 1: 7, The blood oi
Jesus Christ cleanses us from all sin. Similar passages occai
all through the Bible.

IV. " But others argue in fevor of the contrary sentiment
as follows. (1.) Two things are required for salvation, a hben-
tion from death, and a gift of life. The former is obtained ^
the expiation of sin through suffering, the latter by thegiii^'
righteousness, or of the active imputed obedience of ChiW'
To this I answer. That the passive obedience of Christ exjU^
sin and gives life ; because life is obtained for us ftom the
death of Christ. He died, that he might liberate ns m
death, and that being dead he might bestow life.

(2.) " It is objected that Christ not only oflfered himself o»»
death for us, but he also sanctified himself for os ; that we

1838.^ Views of the Early Reformert, 447

might be saoctified through the truth, John 17: 19. Therefore
the boliuess of Christ, and also his righteousness or active
obedience is imputed to us. To this I answer that the conse-
quence is denied; 1. The holiness of Christ assists us in the
obtainment of holiness, even though it be not imputed to us, as
we have explained above. 2. In the passage quoted in the
objection, the active obedience of Christ is not to be understood
by sanctification ; but his determination and preparation for
entering upon the sacerdotal office.

(3.) *^ It is also objected that the actual disobedience of Adam
constituted us sinners ; and that therefore the actual obedience
of Christ roust constitute us righteous. But I answer, that if
by the actual obedience of Christ, mentioned in the conclusion,
his active obedience is to be understood ^for the passive obe-
dience of Christ may itself be properly called actual)^ we deny
the consequence. For whatever we have lost by the disobe-
dience of Adam, is restored to us by the passive obedience of
Christ imputed, which alone he accomplished in our stead ; al-
though he also performed the active for our benefit, as we have
above explained.

(4.) '^ It is further objected that with the passive obedience
of Christ his active obedience is also united ; and that therefore
one cannot be imputed to us without the other. But the con-
sequence is denied : for what are even united, may yet never-
theless be distinct, and therefore as one can be contemplated
without the other, so one may in like manner be imputed. In
the mean time we do not deny that the voluntary sufferings of
Christ, that is, his suffering conjoined with the action and readi-
ness of the will, is imputed to us. But this is not the active
obedience of Christ concerning which we now speak, and
which, as a man, Christ owed the law. For as he was not, as
man obligated to die, so neither was he obliged to a promptitude
of dying.

(5.) " If only the passive obedience of Christ is imputed to us,
says the objector, it would follow that only a half Christ was
given to us, viz. a suffering, and not an acting one. But the
consequence is false ; and therefore so must be the antecedent.
The assumption is proved, because he was given wholly to us.
Is. 9: 6. But I reply, that the consequence of the connection
is denied. For it is one thing to be given to us, and quite an-
other thing to be imputed to us. Even the humanity and deity

448 VUtDi of the Early Heformtn. [Oct.

of Christ were giveo to us, neither of which was therefiire im-
puted to us.

^' Trtdy^ theirs is a horrible opinianj toko deny tksit tk
passive obedience of Christ is imputed to us for righteonsMsi,
and that it is the cause of our obtaining the reward ofeiend
life ! For bow can the blood of Christ cleanse us from all sd,
if it is not the cause of our righteousness ? How did Christ gift
his flesh for the life of the world, if through him life is noire-
stored to us ? How are we healed by the bniise of theMessiib;
if through him we are not sanctified ? How is the deadi of
Christ our life, if by it life is not allotted to us ? There cto be
no middle condition between absolution from the curse of the
law, and the blessing and right of eternal inheritance."*

* Thes, W II, '^ Hactemus efficiens justificationis : Materia ejus id
uppellari solet, per et propter quod coram tribunal! diviuo a maledie-
tioue legis, absotvimur, et innocentes ac justi reputamur: est id pa<-
fecta Christi pro nobis satisfactio, qua poenas propter peccaia nobii
debitas nostro loco ipse luit : alias appellatur justitja ex obedieolii
Christi paesiva.''

Explicatio. I, " Quando Christi satisfnctionem appellamos materiiB
iiostrae justificationis, cum vulgo loquimur: aliaa eadecn recteappc^
latur causa meritoria noatrae juatificationis, siquidem propter bane
imputatam justi censemur et a inaledictione legis alisokimor. IX-
verso autem respectu Christi meritum est causa vocatioais et jostifi-
cationis. Nam vocationis causa est absolute consideraturo, siqanlcB
praecedit ea (idem : justification is causa idem est respective conade
ratum, hoc est, cum respectu ad (idem, quia non justificanior per
Christi meritum, nisi fide apprehensiini. II. Hie vero obserne-
dum : duplicem esse Christi obedientiam, nempe activam et paasiTan.
Activa obedientia est qua Christus conformem divinae legi ▼itaiDCgit,
oniiiia ejus mandata perfecte observando : unde dicitur dofus io if»
non fuisse, Jesiae 53: 9. Nou novisse peccatum, 2 Cor. 5: 31. Noe
fecisse peccatum, 1 Pet. 2: 22. Tentatus in omnibus absque ffeeeaM,
Heb. 4: 15. Passiva est, qua maledictionem legis, cui nos propter
p6ccatn eramus obnoxii, nostro loco sustinuit, patiendo pro nobis et
moriendo, adcoque poenam nostro loco pcrsolvendo. Unde P«ui*
Gal. 3: 13. Christus nos redetnit ab execratione legis, dum faetus eit
pro nobis execratio."

IH. '* Utraque baec Christi obedientia ad nostri rederopcioMfli et
justi ficntiotiem omnino est neceasaria, nou tamen eodem modo: tb
utraque ad nos redundat salus, sed non eodem raodo. Nam oiiedh
entia activa est conditio in mediatore requisita, abcK|ue qua roediaW
noster Christus esse non potuisset, suaque niorte oibil proiBeien
potuisset. Interim tamen obedientia haec, si proprie et aecurtti lo-

1838.] Views of the Early Reformers. 449

He next proceeds to answer the objection that " the law b
not fulfilled by the endurance of punishment ; and that there-

quainur, non est materia nostrae justificationis, nee imputatur nobis,
ita ut noster cenwatur, et nobis propter earn peccata remittantur et
debitu in legis pro nobis soU'atur : quemadmoduni passivam per im-
putationem cenaetur nostra, et propter earn peccata nobis remittuntur :
debitumque nostro loco solvitur : prolmtur hoc : (1) Christus, quate-
nus homo, obedientiam, legi activam, pro se debuit : tenetur enim
ereatori suo obedire omnis creatura, neque magis indulgere Deua
homini potest, ut itdxjwg se geret, qiiam justitiae suae ordinem ever*
tere, ut recte Scholastic! docent. Ergo obedientia ilia nobis non im-
putatur.''

" Ratio consequentiae a pari petitiir : siquidem eadem ratio^e : ai
Christus mortem legi pro se debuisset et praestitisset, nobis imputara
earn, et per earn nos liberare non potuisset."

'*£xcipitur: Christus non pro se, sed pro nobis factus est homo.
Ergo non pro se, sed pro nobis, hoe est, nostro loco, obedientiam legi
activam praestitit. Respondeo I. Antecedens ambiguum : si dicaa
Christum factum esse hominem pro nobis, hoc est, nostro bono, con*
ceditur: si pro nobis, hoc est, nostro loco, negatur. Quod enim
Christus nostro loco fecit et factus est, id nos non tenemur facere et
fieri : veluti pro nobis factus est execratio, ne nos essemus et tenere-
mur, esse aetema execratio. Atqui incarnatione sua Christus hoc non
est consecutus est, ut nos amplius homines non essemus, vel tenere*
mur humanae naturae congrua facere. II. Consequentia negatur.
Etiamsi enim Christus non suo, sed nostro bono factus est homo : ta-
men postquam factus est homo, per se homo fuit, ideoque per se et
pro se legi obnoxius, qua homo : quemadroodum postquam corpus
per se corruptioni obnoxium assumsit, pro se quoque opus habuit ci*
bo, potu, quiote, etc."

(2.) ^ Si nostro loco activam obedientiam Christus praestitisset, ita
ut ad justitiam ea nobis imputaretur, nos ad obedientiam activam legi
praestandam amplius obligati non essemus. Atqui falsum eonse-
queus : ergo et antecedens. Connexi ratio itidem a pari petitur : si-
quidem ideo ad aetemam mortem sustinendam nos amplius obligati
non sum lis, quia Christus nostro loco earn sustinuit."

" Excipiunt nonnulli : Christum pro nobis activam obedientiam
praestitisse vitne aeternae promerendae causa : Hoc vero nomine nos
amplius ad obedientiam legis non obtigari. Besp. Negamus, vitae
aeternae promerendae causn Christum loco nostro activam obedien-
tiam praestitisse. Ratio est : quia earn pro se simpliciter debuit. tan-
quam creaturn, quae exiex esse non potest: adeoque per eam nobis
nihil promeritus est, etiamsi maximo nostro bono eam praestitit."

** Qui dicunt, per obedientiam Christi activam nos habere, quod
amplius ad rigidam illam et exactam obedientiam activam obligati
non simus : cum veritate sententiam suam vix conciliabunt Nam si

Vol. III. No. 32- 57

450 Views of the Early Reformers, [Ocr.

fore the endurance of punishment cannot be the cause of ourob>
taining the reward, or eternal life/' but as Ursinus, Pareus, and

lid exactam legis obedientiam amplius obli^jrati non easemiis, Dti<|iia
lion peccarerotis ejus iiuerinissione et neglectu, quod falsum. Sn-
inns igitur omnino ad earn obligati : defectus autem condonatur prop-
ter impiitarn, non activam, sed paastvam mediatoris Christi obediea-
tiam : paiilatimque per sanctificatiouem suppletur, quam iMsaioDe qo^*
que sua mediator est proineritus."

(3.) " Ubique scripturn, quando loquitur de jtistificatione noalri et
purgatione a peccatit*, eorumque remissione, non activae, sed paanraa
obedientiue Christi mentionem facit. Inter alia scripturae testinioiiia
banc in sententiarn insignia sunt : Jesiae 53: 5, 6, Livore ejus [nempo
Messiae] sanati sumus. [Deus] Conjecit in eura iniquitatea ornniuoi
nostrum. Rom. 3: 24, 25, Omnes justificamur gratia, ejus gratia, per
redeinptionem factam in Cbristo Jesu, quern Deus proposuit, uteflseC
placamentuni per fidem in sanguine ipsius. Rom. 5: 9, Justificati
ejus sanguine servabimur nunc niulto magis ab ira: et ren, 10, Se-
conciliati fuimus Deo per mortem iilii. Gal. 3: 23, Cbriscua redcmk
nos ab execratione legis cum factus est pro nobis execratio. 1 Jobo
1: 7, Sanguis Jesu Christi purgat nos ab omni peccato. SimiJia pas-
sim occurruiit."

IV. ^ In contrariam sententiarn alii ita disputant ; (1.) Ad salotem
nostnim duo requiruntur: liberatio a morte, et donatio vitae: illi*
peccati per passionem expiatione, haec dono jnstitiae, sea obedientiae
Christi activae imputatae obtitietur. Resp. Obedientia Christi psssrri
et peccata expint, et vitam donat, quia ex morte Christi vita nobis ob>
tingit : ipse mortuus est, et e morte nos liberaret et mortuus ▼ion
donaret."

(2.) " Christus non solum pro nobis in mortem se obtulit, sed etiaa
seipsum pro nobis sanctificavit, ut simus ipsi sanctificati per reriti-
tem. John 17: 19, Ergo sanctitas quoque Christi et justitia seu obe-
dientia active noliis imputatur. Resp. Consequentia negatur : 1. Sanc-
titas Christi nobis ad sanctitatcm prodest, etiamsi nobis non imputa-
tur, ut supra explicavimus. 2. In allegato loco per sanctificatiooem
Christi non intelligitiiractiva ejus oliedientia : sed deetinatio etpraep**
ratio ejus ad officiuin sacerdotale obeundum."

(3.) " Actualis inobedientia Adami nos |>eccatore8 ronstituit. Ergo
actuaiis Christi obedientia nos constituit justos. Resp. Si in coua^
quente per actualem Christi obedientiam intelligitur activam (nam d
passive potest appellari actunlis, quia actu, non poientia tantum, p^s*
sus est Christus, eaque nobis inipiitata,] consequentiam negaaiui.
Quicquid enini per inobedientiam Adami admissinuis id restitait nobii
obedientia Christi passiva imputain, quam solam nostro loco praestidt:
etsi et activam nostro bono praestitit ; ut ante diximus."

(4.) ''Cum ol)edieniia Christi passive etiam coujimcta fuit aecir&
Ergo una sine altera nobis non imputatur. Resp. Coneequeoiia ne-
gatur: nam et quae conjuncta sunt, nibilominua diatineia ■oMftdflo-

1888.] VUwi of the Early Reformers. 45 L

Tilenus have already abundantly answered this objection in tbe
preceding quotations, we think it unnecessary to add here the
answer of Wendeline.

This author has never been, by the most rigid of CalvinistSi
accused of heresy. His work has been, ever since its first ap-
pearance, esteemed as one of the roost admirable text books of
Calvinistic Theology. To those who are acquainted with the
works of Wendeline, his very dust itself is precious.* For
another reason the work from which the preceding extract is
taken, is entitled to the utmost regard from all the followers of
Calvin. Its author drew the entire materials of which it is
composed, from the works of the great leading Calvinistic

que ut unum sine alio potesi cognosci, ita et imputari. Interim non
negamus, passionern Christi voluntarium, hoc est, cum actione et
promptitudine ?oluntati8 conjunctam, nobis imputari, sed hoc nihil ad
obedientiaui Christi activam, de qua in specie hio loquiinur, quam
qua homo, legi Cbristus debuit : Nam ut ad mortem, qua homo, non
fait obligatua, ita uec ad prooiptitudineni rooriendi."

(5.) ** Si passiva Christi obedientia tantum nobis imputaretur, ae-
queretur, dimidium tantum Christum nobis datum, nempe patieutem,
non agentem. Atqui fulsum consequens: ergo et antecedens. As-.
atunptio probatur quia totus nobis est datus. Is. 9 : 6. Resp. Con-
next consequentia negatur: aliud enim est nobis dari, aliud nobis im-
putari : Etiam Christi humanitas et Deitas nobis est data, neutra ta-
men propterea nobis imputatur. Certe dura est sententia eorum, qui
negnnt obedientiam Cbristi passivam nobis imputari ad justitiam et
esse praemii, aeu ?itae aeternae causam. Qui enim sanguis Cbristi
nos purgaret ab oroni peccato, si nostrae justitiae causa uon esset ?
Qui camem suam Cbristus dedisset pro mundi ?ita, si per eum vita
nobis non restitueretur ? Qui livore Messiae essemus sanati : si per
eum non essemus sanctificati ? Qui mors Christi nostra esset vita, si
per eam vita nobis non obtingeret ? Inter absolutionem a maledic-
tione legis et benedictionem atque jus aeternae baereditatis status me-
dius non datur.**

* The writer being from borne a few weeks since, stopped at the
house of a venerable clergyman who claims to be an old-scbool Cal-
vinist, both In doctrines and in measurea He possesses a great many
very valuable works of tbe reformers. The subject of their merits
as theologians was introduced and discussed ; in the course of which
tbe venerable father observed that he had " two volumes of an old
writer with which he would not part for their weight in silver, unless
be could replace them." I inquired the name of the old divine.
My friend could not just then recollect it ; but going into his study
he brought out aed laid npon the uble before me two quarto volumes
of tbe works ef Wendeline.

452 VUwi of the Early Reformers. [Oct.

divines who bad preceded him. Amoogst whom he names
Calvin, Beza, Zanchius, Ursinus, Parens, Scultetus, Tileous,
" and others'* says he, " whom it would be tedious to enumerate;
and with whom I believe it to be more safe to speak and to
thinJCf than to labor after singul^trities and innovatiomJ**

We regret the necessity of omitting a number of other, ex-
cellent witnesses. But both the time and the limits assigaed us
forbid us to extend this essay any further than to add a few re-
marks, suggested by the preceding discussion.

Conclusion.

One of the devout aspirations of Martin Ijuthery was ^'Maj
the Lord deliver his church from the vain-glorious teacher, frooi
the contentious pastor, and from unpro6table questions."! Our
heart respond amen to this prayer. It is not therefore our
wish by anything we here present, to engender strife: but
merely to offer a few passing remarks, which may be worthy of
consideration.

1. It may be thought by some that we might have taken up
and considered the remaining specifications of alleged error in
the case alluded to on the preceding pages. One reason for
declining this is that the present essay is already of sufficient
length. In addition to this we beg leave to remark 1. That
with respect to the remaining specifications, it is universally ad-
mitted that they are not of equal importance with those which
we have considered. 3. Of the ten, we have selected the three,
to which the greatest importance has been attached by those
brethren who have sympathized with the prosecutor in this case.
3. Those brethren have themselves rendered such examination
unnecessary, by their own repeated avowals and declarations.
For it has been alleged by almost every individual who has
taken a prominent stand on that side of the controversy, that

* ** Ad commeDtarios conciiina iidoe lit>eraleni operam contuleniot
praesiantissimi quique EceUsiarum no$trarum dodores; CaivioiMi
Bezo, Martyr, Zanchius, Ursinufs Perkimsiua, Pareus, Pitiflcus, Scal-
tetua, Wittakerua, Sutliviuci, Molinaeua, Chamierus, Tilenua, Juniiii)
Sibrandua, Bucanua, Amesiua, et alii, qiios recenaere longom f^'
cum quibua et loqui et aentire tutiua eaae arbitrior, qiiaiu novivtil'V
et aingularitatibua atudere." Vide Prefat, p. 27, 28.

t ** A doctore glorioao, et paatore contentioao, et iDutilibos quas^
tionibui liberet Eccleaiam auam Dominus." Luth. Opp. torn. I. p- ^^'

1838.] VUwsof the Early Reformers. 4S3

the whole series of charges comprises errors of stteh a nature^*
that to a logical mind^ the admission of either of the prominent
ones, must of necessity carry with it the admission of all the se-
ries : because such minds err systematically, and these errors
constitute '' a system of Gospel subverting/' and '' reformation-
abandoning doctrine." If this be sound argumentation, then, as
DO one can refuse to acknowledge that all the forequoted au-
thors, were men of logic, learning and acuteness, they must by
consequence, fand along with them all the first reformers with-
out exception,) have been guilty of entertaining the whole num-
ber of specifications of alleged heresy. And if this be sd, where
is the necessity of entering into a similar discussion of the re-
maining topics ?

We had intended, however, to include in the present essay,
an examination of the views entertained by the Reformers, on
the only remaining topic, to which the brethren of whom we
speak have united in attaching serious importance. We mean
the topic of imputation. We cannot now, however, do more
than remark, that the reformers universally deny that the essen-
tial righteousness of the God-man Mediator becomes ours. They
reject the idea with abhorrence : and perpetually speak of ouf
being regarded as righteous on account ol the merit of Christ,
on account of the death of Christ, for the sake of Christ.f
These are their almost unvaried expressions with regard to it.

The foregoing quotations, have, however, made this doctrine
plain, as held by these venerable men. It is therein declared
at once, how plain and simple were their views, as contrasted
with those now claimed by some to be ^' old school " and
orthodox. Sin, when punished^ is imputed : when forgiv-
en, or not punished^ it is not imptUedi The imputation of
righteousness is the forgiveness of sins : avid this u done " &y,
and on account of^^ what Christ has suffered for us. This is
the sum total of the doctrine as they held it, (as the preceding
quotations themselves evince,) and what can be more rational
and scriptural !

3. There have been grievous charges preferred against a
large portion of the clergy in this country, to this eiSect, that
they persist in vexing the church by the introduction and use

* See * Vindication,' p. 28 — 32, together with the Reports of the
trial at York and Pittsburg.

t Their words are ^propter meritum Cbristi, propter Cbriftiim,
propter mortem Cbristi," etc.

454 Fieurt of the Early Refmnen. [Oct.

of a new phraseology. But od wboniy agieeaUj to the pie-
ceding quotations, must this charge now rest ? Are those who
tenaciously adhere, (though it has cost them loss of coailbit,
reputation, if not life itself^ indirectly in some instances,) to the
very language of tlie reformation in relation to its distinctive
doctrine, to be branded as new lights^ innovaiorsy and the n^
ventors of a new theological nomenclature 7 Who is, in troth
and reality, guilty of this charge ? I will state a simple ooi-
domed fact, and leave it with the reader. It b this: the
originators of the scheme of the imputation of Christ's actife
obedience, were in their day reproached by the Reformeis with
thus perplexing the church. And they attempted to justify
themselves on the ground that a perspicuous and concct
theologv required such distinctions to be observed.

3. If the Reformers entertained correct views of the doctrioe
of Justification, Faith, and the Obedience of Christ, (which it
would be absurd for Calvinists to deny,*) then, as the views
which the brethren of whom we have above spoken, eDte^
tained of these doctrines, were the great cause of their attempted
ejection from the church, it follows from what has appeared,
that, had the counsels of their assailants prevailed, they would
have been expelled from a professedly Calvinistic commoDitj,
for entertaining the very doctrines on these subjects, whick
were taught by Calvin himself, and all his immediate followen;
while at the same time, those who have attempted their expul-
sion have agreeably to their own showing, radically departed
from these doctrines. A radical departure, on their owo aO'
knowledged principles, is syllogistically demonstrable. Be*
cause in a great variety of expressions they have declared, that,
between their views on these subjects, and the views of those
whom they have attempted to exclude, ^* there b not any
agreement ; and there ought not to be any compromise." So
different indeed, that the one party has declared that, oo the
principles of the other, they cannot ^' read their title clear, to
mansions in the skies."t If> then, there be this great and
radical difference, who, (and we press the inquiry with deep

* " The creeds of the reformers do not need revisiDg ; and if tbfl|
did, the men are probably not living to whom the task could be kit
with safety." See Sermon by C. C. Cuyler, D. D. of Philadelphii,
preached before the synod of Philadelphia, at its searioD in Torfc, P^
Occl83S.

t Sea <" Vindication," and <" Trial of Rev. Albert Barnes.*

1838.] Viem of the Early Reformers. 455

and solemn interest,) who are the persons that have thus radi-
cally departed from the doctrines and principles of the Reforma-
tion?

It has always been the boast of Presbyterians that the Con-
fession and Catechisms of their Church, contain an admirable
and unadulterated epitome of the doctrines of the reformation ;
at least on the subject of Justification, the Obedience of Christ,
and Imputation. Here again we press the inquiry, and ask.
If this be so, who are the individuals that have really departed
from the true sense of the standards ?

If the ground is to be taken, that the commonly called old-school
brethren have improved on the views of the Reformation, let
the stand be taken boldly and openly ; and let the world bear
DO more of the charge which they have been for years urging
against their brethren^ that they have departed from these

Krinciples ! Or if the ground be assumed that the views of the
Reformers are reconcilable with our standards, let us bear no
more of this radical, and uncompromisable difference. If they
are reconcilable let them he reconciled; that harmony and
confidence may again be found within the borders of the lacera-
ted, but blood-bought Zion of our God.

The plain and simple question, which, if answered categori-
cally, will terminate at once the controversy, at least virtually,
is the following : Were the reformers heretics on the subject of
justification ? Let this question be answered either affirmatively
or negatively, and let the answer be given fearlessly. If the
noble army of reformers are to be denounced as heretics, and at
once excluded, let it be known. If they are to be recognized,
let it be known.

If it be contended, that the men whose testimony we have
adduced, were in error on these subjects, we demand to know
what is to be our standard by which to judge of the theology of
the first reformers ? Creeds framed subsequently cannot be our
criterion, if we find in them an acknowledged departure from
the principles originally inculcated ; and for the same reason,
men who lived subsequently cannot be our guide, if they in like
manner openly abandon and attempt the correction of what was
primitively taught.

4. By these remarks it is not our intention to widen the
breach in the walls of the city of our God, but to repair it. We
^ill therefore urge upon the attention of all concerned in these
controversies, another subject for consideration, which may

456 VUvfi of the Early Reformers, [Oct.

sist them in disentaogliog themselves from their difficultiek
We have already seen that disputes arose in the church in d»
beginning of the seventeenth century, some of which were opoD
the topics discussed in this article. Polanus and Gomar disputed
on faith, and yet their love and confidence in each other were
not impaired. Two Calvinists of the most rigid sect, were, in
A. D. 1604, drawn into a controversy with each otb^ od the
subject of faith and the obedience of Christ. They were Dis.
Tilenus and Molinaeus. The former took the ground at*
tributed to him in this essay, whilst Dr. Molinaeus oocapied t
stand somewhat different. The controversy was long and ex-
citing, (and led ultimately to the action of the French syood
previously spoken of;) but it was at length amicably seukd.
^^ Each," as a contemporary remarks,* ^^ persisting in retainiif
his own views of the matter, and yet each acknowledging the
other as orthodox." Go thou and do likewise.

If there was a desire deeply felt by the great men of tbe
reformation, it was this, that there might be a concentratioD of
christian eflbrt in the great work of pulling down the strnf
holds of sin, and glorifying their God and Saviour. Of all the
first men of the reformation, there were scarcely two between
whom there was not more or less difference in their views of
some points in theology. Nor was it their primary care tt)
compose these differences. They knew that with frail, ening
men, it would be vain to seek an entire conformity of sentifneDt
on every point : and hence they gave that over, and sought
union of effort. It is truly affecting to review their unceasiog
exertions to attain to this object. We have referred to the
Marpurgense Colloquy, between the Liutheran ministers and
those of Helvetia : they instituted one similar, and for a siffliltf
purpose, 1537. In 1570, a similar effort was made by the ad-
herents to the Confessions of Augsburg, Bohemia, and Helvetia.
In 1575, the same was attempted by those denominated Hosa-
ites and Waldensian brethren in the kingdom of Bohemia, and
likewise the followers of the Augsburg symbol : many other
instances could be specified if necessary. Let us learn to um-
tate their example in this respect, for it Is worthy of imitalioo-

* ^ Quae con ten tic, interventu Domini de Plessw et alionim quo*
rumlam doctorum, eum in modum sublata est, ut alter alteram p|*
orthodoxo doctore agnoverit, utroque interea in aententia eua peia**
tente.'* Vide OmtioDem Grotii babitam in senatu Aroatelrodajnen^
anno 1616, opp. Tbool. torn. IV. p. 179, col. 9l

1838.] Views of the Early Reformers. 457

Luther has 6nely remarked, '^ I have learned that he is not a
theologian who knows great things, and who can teach many
things; but he who lives holily, and as becomes the gospel." *

If the private declarations were called for of such men as
JVIeiancthon, Bucer, Zanchius, Pareus, etc. on the subject of the
importance of union among those who unite in their reception
of the doctrines of grace, we could fill pages with them.

Such then was the church, when in the hands of the blessed
men whom God so signally honored as the instruments qf re-
claiming it to vitality and righteousness. And if there is a
prayer to which our inmost soul will fervently respond, it is that
of the feeling and experimentally pious Bernard, which we
would adapt to our own day. '^ Quis mihi det, antequam mo-
riar, videre Ecclesiam Dei, sicut in diebus antiquis." f

Who can tell what blessings the great Head of the church
may have in store for his people ? The composing of the un-
happy differences which have so long palsied their very best
energies, and led them to turn against each other those weapons
which are mighty to puU down the strong holds of Satan, may
be the signal of the returning favor of the Messiah. It is a
test of love and obedience that he has the right to require at our
bands ; and it may be the signal of his bursting the fetters of
paganism, and of his raining down righteousness upon America,
till she shall bud and blossom as the garden of God. ^' Bring
ye all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in
my house, and prove me now herewith, saith the Lord of hosts,
if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you
out a blessing that there shall not be room enough to receive it.
— ^And all nations shall call you blessed ; for ye shall be a de-
lightsome land, saith the Lord of hosts."

* ^ Ego hoc video, non esse theologura, qui magna aciat, et malta
doceat: sed qui sancte et theologice vivat.'' Vide Prtfat. Luih. in
PsaL ad Theologiae Siudiosos.

t '' Oh that, before I die, I may behold the church of God as it
was io ancieot days !"

Vol. XII. No. 38. 58

458 Mosaic Origin of the Peniaieuch. [Oct.

ARTICLE VIII.

Causes or the Denial of the Mosaic Origih of tbi

Pentateuch.

TniMhiUd from th« G«riMn of Prof. HtngstMilMrc of B»rUo. By R«v. £. lUlialaM*-
vinUnt tuitnietor in tb« Union Thooi. ifem. Prioce Edward, Va. [Coociadad frsa TcL
XI. IV 448.]

Naiuralitm.

Having shown that the geoeral denial of the genuineness of
the Pentateuch cannot be satisfactorily accounted for b/ the
universal tendency of the age to historical skepticism, we idu^
now endeavor to point out its true cause.

L lies in the tendency of the age to Naturalism — that sys^
tern which seeks to explain all events by the common laws of
nature — and this tendency has its root in the estrangeoieot of
the age from God. Because men have not bad within theoh
selves experimental proof of the existence of a living Godi
therefore they seek to eradicate all traces of him outof bistoi;.
Because within themselves every thing goes on entirely accorf-
ing to fixed natural laws, therefore they think every thing with*
out them must have happened in the same way.

This mode of thinkmg and reasoning has, by those wto
adopted it, been called by the dignified name of rennement (Bil*
dung.)* But this certainly unjustly. Naturalism could be coo-
sidered an advanced stage of refinement only on the ground tint
its modem advocates had discovered that what had before been
held to be supernatural through ignorance of the lawsofnauve,
can be fully accounted for by those laws. But as the laoden
extended knowledge of nature does not afiect this matter at aU)
as that is still looked upon as supernatural which was befixe
held to be so, it is only through gross insolence that the natD^
of refinement can be arrogated. This pretension brings with*
many absurdities. It must, in the first place, against all en-
dence, be maintained that the advocates of the mythos-ibffXh
at the present time, are more cultivated than the defeodeis^
the truth of the Bible. Then again, there is in tbe histoi; «

* The word expresses the highest stage of advanoement in e**T
respect, especially in knowledge and taste. — Tb.

1838.] Naiwralim. 459

oppontion to the Pentateuch a pariie hmteusef which those
on that side endeavor carefully to conceal, and of which one
gets not a bint fiom histories like that of Harunann. If the
denial of the genuineness of the Pentateuch is to be eulogized
as refinement, then they also must be considered refined, whom
we have always hitherto been accustomed to regard as rude and
uncultivated in the highest degree. Take, for example, the
free-thinkers of Calvin's time, the dogif hogs^ and foois^ as he
constantly calls them, who in that day made sport of the Penta-
teuch.* Also the author of the Catechitme de thaHneU-hammey-f
who says, p. 10, ^^ the events recorded in the Pentateuch aston-
bh those who judge only by their reason, and in whom this
blind reason has not been enlightened by special grace." This
author, it seems, then possessed ahready that ' cultivated under-
standing,' which is, according to De Wette, a priori confident
of the spuriousness of the Pentateuch, because it contains ac*
counts of miracles and prophecies. Refinement is to be as-
cribed too to the vulgar Edemann, who makes the Pentateuch
to be nothing but ^'pieces thrown together, put into their
present order by nobody knows who," but probably ^* the crafty
rabbi, E^ra." (See his Moses mit aufgedecktem Angesicht^
p. 9. u. a. Stellen.) Also to the two almndoned and hslf-crazy
nuns in a clobter of Tuscany, who according to De Potter,
Fie dt Sdpio Bicciy T. I. p. 1 15, Ed. II., declared on trial that
they believed Moses and the authors of the other books of the
Bible to be worthy of no more regard than for example Plu-
tarch, or any other profane writer. % Singular fathers and moth-
ers of refinement ! harbingers of the rising sun of illumination !

* See for instance his Commentary on Gen. 6: 14 (on Noah's ark),
^Hoc Porphyrtus vel qttispiam alius eaniSf fabulosum esse obganniet,
quia non apparet ratio, vel quia est insolitum, vel quia repugnat com-
mnnis ordo naturae. Ego regero contra, totam banc Mosis narratio-
nem, nisi miraeulis referta esset, frigidam ec jejunam, et ridiciilam fore
dieo.'' On Gen. 49: 1, ^ Sed oblatrant quidatn protervi canes : unde
Mosi notitia sennonis in obecurio tugurio ante ducentos annos habiti.**

t * Catechism of the genteel man.' — ^ Les ^v^nemeats recont^
dans le Pentateuque ^tonnent ceuz qui ont le malbeur de ne juger,
que par leur raison et dans qui cette raison aveugle n'est pas eelair^e
par une grace particuliere."

I ** Que Moise et les autres auteurs des Uvres qui composent la
saiDte bible, fbissent plus dignes de consideration, qu'un Plutarque par
ezemple, ou quolque autre ^rivain profane."

460 Mosaic Origin of the Pentateuch. [Oct.

That Naturalism is the real vital principle of the oppodtioo
made to the Pentateuch, appears plainly from the violent eftris
made before the final step of denying the genuineness w»
taken,* in order to bring the Pentateuch to coincide with the
reigning spirit of the times. Eichhom, who shows what bis
ground is in regard to religion by the following few words:
(Einleitung Th. 3. s. 1 76) << For us who have investigated the
causes of things, the name of God is often, in such cases, an a-
pletive that may be dispensed withJ*^ Eichhom labors, by ex-
plaining away everything that is supernatural, to set aside
whatever presupposes the existence of a living personal God.
That he and his contemporaries were ready to make the innneose
sacrifices which were necessary in order to carry through soch
a plan of interpretation, shows how strong the motive was which
influenced them, and how entirely it accounts for the oooise
afterwards taken, when it was no longer possible to conceal the
defects and difficulties of this one. A few examples will shov
what sort of reverence for ' the hand in the clouds' was mab-
tained while the genuineness of the Pentateuch was still admit-
ted. Eichhom thinks (Einleit. Th. 3. s. 303) that the destiw-
tion of Korah and his company creates no difficulty, if we wil
not mistake the nature of symbolic language. '* Might oot the
writer, in order to represent very strongly the aw fulness of the
unusual punishment which was threatened, viz. the bwyag
them alive, call it a swallowing up by the earth, a going ion
alive into the pit?" It is just as easy, according to him, to
free the budding of Aaron's rod of its miraculous cbaraciw.
" If, when, by a new trial by lot with staves, Aaron obtaloed
for himself and his family again the office of high-priest, his staff
was twined with buds, leaves, and fruit, and thus carried throujii

* With what difficulty the determination was made to take th'a
final step, and how strong therefore the proofs of the genuioeoeff of
the Pentateuch are, (even those that lie on the surface; for of such tf
lie deeper, men hnd then no conception,) is shown by a reiaaHr of
Corrodl in his Bdtuchlung des Bibelcanons, 1792, Bd. 1. 8.53: "At
present, independent thinkers and lovers of truth regard it no looker
as audacity to express their opinion freely a» to the antiquity of t^
Pentateuch. Yet most friends of Bible study are inclined to tliink
that it is still safer not to use so much freedom in regard to the Pefl-
tateuch as is taken with the other hooks of the Old Testament. I
can also easily conceive that 1 shall he very unwelcome with my d9iAl>
qfthe Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch,^

1838.] Naturaliim. 461

the camp as a sign that it had decided in his hvor, and was
then placed in the sanctuary for an eternal proof of the fact
against any future denial, what is there improbable in all this?"
The shining of Moses' face could, he thitiks, be regarded mirac-
ulous only so long as the nature of electricity was unknown.
Had Eichhom been in the storm on mount Sinai, instead of Mo-
ses, he would on descending have shone in the same way, and
that even down to his toes, if he had before stripped off his
clothing. ^' As he came down from the mount at evening, and
they who saw him perceived that his face shone (the rest of his
body being covered by his clothes), and be and bis contempo-
raries were not able to explain the phenomenon from physical
causes, was it not natural for him to ascribe it to that, oi the re-
ality of which he felt assured, viz. his intercourse with the Dei-
ty," s. 280. The pillar of cloud and fire was, in his opinion,
nothing more than the usual signal given in marching by the
smoke of the caravan-fire, s. 298. In regard to the plagues of
Egypt, ** it has been proved that Moses brought about the de-
liverance of his people from Egypt by means of those natural
evils to which that country is every year subject," s. 253. This
proof he considers himself as having given in bis essay de ^-
gypti Anno Mirabiliy out of which we could quote many more
rare things."* But what has been already adduced will suffice
to show that an inducement which was strong enough to lead
to such a total giving up of common sense, was also strong
enough to lead to a rejection of the genuineness of the Penta-
teuch without and even against all evidence derived Srom the
Pentateuch itself.

Yet the real design of these efforts was declared w:ith perfect
openness — an openness which proceeded from confidence in the
omnipotence of the spirit of the age. And not till afterwards,
when the universal reign of that spirit had ceased, and men be-
gan to feel that mere presupposition or assertion was not proof,
did this design begin again to be concealed and the pretence
made that only historico-critical reasons were regarded, aside
from all doctrinal presupposition, and that without any bias
whatever and even against inclination, the genuineness of the
Pentateuch must be given up. Lately, however, that spirit has
again obtained more power and is conscious of that power, and

* Rosentniieller has considered this essay of sufficient importance
to have its substance embodied in his Commentary. — Tr.

463 Mosaic Origin of the Pentateuch. [Oct.

with the help of the pantheistic teDdeocies of the times, \m
succeeded in becofuiog the universal public sentiment. And as
public sentiment always claims infallibility, and needs take no
notice of the impotent opposition of those who have £dleo be-
hind the age, the mask has begun again to be thrown oC

A few quotations must be made in proof of what has been
just said. Corrodi, who as we have seen (p. 460 note), wis
among the first of those who denied the genuineness of ibe
Pentateuch, says, 1. c. p. 59, 60, after enumerating the mirades
it relates : " Aro not these manifest signs of a later writer who
was not an eye-witness of the events be records ?" The only
reason which he gives is the miraculous accounts. He was
satisfied therefore in asserting that the historical parts wefe of
later origin ; he still allows the laws to have been fironi Hoses.
StaudUn^ in his Geschichte der Siitenlehre Jesu (Histocy of
the moral doctrines of Jesus Christ) Bd. I. s. 118, reinaiks,
^< However it may be in regard to the historical parts of tbe
Pentateuch, which indeed are liable to suspidon on account of
their high miraculous coloring, and in many passages are of
such a character that they must either have been written k)Qg
after Moses, or have been greatly interpolated, yet there aie
strong reasons for believing that the laws were made, written
and collected into one code by Moses himself.'' As Diderot
on his death-bed declared that the first step in philosophy wis
unbelief,* so the reviewer of Fritsche^s Vertheidnaig iff
Aechtheit des Pentateuchs (Defence of the genuineness of the
Pentateuch) in Ammon's and Bertholdt's Journal Th. 4. s.389,
makes unbelief to be the foundation of criticism. What cannot
be accounted for fit>m natural causes must fall. He says:
^* When the author remarks upon Gen. xlix. ^ I hold that Jacob
could have foreseen all this, as he was enlightened by a higher
light,' he stands no longeron the ground of the critic wboseeb
to explain the causes of events, but on that of the theoIoguO)
who cuts the knot." Bertholdt in the section on the spirit of
the Hebrew Historiography (Einl. Th. 3. s. 745 ss.) has tbp
following words, whidb might well have been prefixed as a
motto to the whole : '^ The world is confessedly a nunor aod
as a man looks into a mirror, just so he also looks out of it*' T

* « Le premier pas vers la philosophie c'est I'incr^doDt^" '^
moires, corresp. etc. de Diderot, 1. 1. Par. 1830. p. 56.

t ** Die Welt ist bekanntlich ein Spiegel, und so wie man in eioeB
Spiegel hineinschaut, grade so achaut man aus deoMelben wi^

1838.] Naturalim. 463

By this section be has made the whole subsequent historico-
critical investigation on the Pentateuch really superfluous. It
is an opus mptrerogaiiofiisj apparently undertaken for the
sake of the weak* The sum of this section is this : every
thing (in the Pentateuch^ that presupposes the existence of a
living God is poetic fiction. <* Every historical narrative/' he
remarks, '< which partakes of the supematural,we call mythology;
those narratives especially have a mythical character in which
the divine agency is made to affect immediately the course of
events, as in miracles and revelations." He also without dis-
guise declares unbelief to be the foundation of criticism.
Moses must be denied at once a degree of knowledge which
exceeded the natural means of his age to attain. Since a trans-
cending of the natural limits is impoisibky it is certain a priori
and without examination of the detaib that he never had such
knowledge. Compare s. 773 : '' The common opinion that all
those passages in the Pentateuch which speak of events which
dkl not happen till after the time of Moses are predictions,
certainly deserve the praise of being well*meant ; but criticism
must not sufi&r itself to be bribed by anything — it must have
no other object than to find out and bring to light historical
truth." — De Wette, whose words, * and the reality is often very
difierent from what we have imagined,' (Beytr. S. p. 10.)
contain his own condemnation,* speaks just as unreservedly. In
the ' Axioms' which are placed at the commencement of his
KritiJc d. Lraelitisch. Gesckichie (Critical Examination of the
Jewish History) p. 15, he says : A narrator who relates things
as realities which in the natural course of events are entirely
impossible and inconceivable, and contradict both experience
and the laws of nature, who gives out such things as history,
and places them in the series of historical facts ; such a one

beraus." As in looking at our own image in a mirror we ourselves
are the source and cause of what we see, so our ideas and under-
standing of objects and events in the world are affected, nay created,
by our previously formed opinions. The Hebrew historians bdiated
that God did often interpose supematurally in the affairs and events
of this world, and the consequence was that they bad many cases of
such interposition to relate.^ Almost Berkeley's tbeory-^that external
things have only an ideal existence. — ^Tr.

* He gives another self-ooodemning sentence on p. 239 : *' In hkh
toty as well as in life, we uNist expect the best of every ene antil the
contrary is proved."

464 Moiaic Origin of the Pentateuch, [Oct.

although his intention may be to relate bistoiy, is Dot a oanator
of history but of poetic fiction.* And such a oarrator desencs
no sort of credit in any thing. For though other facts rehied
by him appear natural and probable, yet, in such compaoj,
they are not to be considered such. They are things out of
another world, and may have been invented as well as the
miraculous ones." The Israelitish history could not, it is trae,
pass the ordeal of a criticism based on such axioois as these;
but it is hard to see what criticism has to do if such axioms are
established. The easy mockery of Voltaire would be moie ia
place than laborious and dull criticism. In the first tiute
editions of this author's Einleit. ins A. T. (Introduction to die
Old Testament,) at the outset of the investigation on tbe
Pentateuch, <$» 145, we find this passage : ^^ It is in this way
also that so many occurrences contradict the laws of nature and
suppose an immediate interposition of God. If it b to the
cultivated understanding a settled matter (entscheiden) that
such miracles did not really happen, the question oocon
whether they so appeared to tbe eye-witnesses and pardcipa-
tors ; but this must also be denied ; and thus we come to tbe
conclusion that these accounts were not contemporaneous and
were not derived from contemporaneous sources." Thus the
spuriousness of the Pentateuch is established before any in-
vestigation, and is to be maintained although tbe stroogest
proofs might be urged against it. In the 4tb edition we God
these words slightly yet very essentially changed. It is then
said, '^ If it is for the cultivated understanding at least doubtfid
(wenigstens zweifelhaft) whether such miracles did reaDf
happen." We have here an example of the befbre-mentiooed
accommodation to the spirit of the times. Another is afibrded
us by Hartmann who s. 358, considers not the miracles a
suchy but the frequent mixing in of unnecessary miracles fx the

* Here also it can be shown by examples how even those biitori-
ans who come nearest to this perverted theology, fkll short of the
merit (or demerit, as you please,) of fully imbibinf its spirit Voo
Rotteck (see vol. XI, p. 446) remarks (1. c. p. 24) : ** An impossible hex,
t. e. such a one as contradicts itself or some other fact, or tbe Itwf of
nature, can never obtain rational belief .... I speak here not of proper
miracles, i. e. things that are referred to as sach — ^fbr tbe very notiea
of a miracle supposes a departure from the laws of natnre. TeC he
who admits in general the possibility of miraelaa, will yet nqairs
atronger proof for their authentication than in the case of nanual ftie»'

1838.] Naturalim. 465

accomplishiDg of unimportant objects, as proof of the mythical
character of the Pentateuch ; although upon his ground, even
the spare mixing in of appropriate miracles for important ob-
jects would be sufficient proof of the same mythical character
of the Pentateuch. In a new edition of De Wette's Einleitung
we may expect to see the third step taken, a return to open*
ness ; for, as we see from the preface to his Commentary on
Matthew, his confidence in the continued advance of general
cultivation, and his contempt for those who ip the last turn of
things see only a temporary change of the spirit of the age,
have in the mean time, most astonishingly increased. But we
need not wait for De Wette — his representative, von Bohlen
has already taken this third step. Or is it still not quite with
the old open heartedness that the latter remarks, (Gen. Einl.
8. 36.) '^ Criticism as such is always unbelieving ;" and with
whbh Vatke says, s. 9, *^ Very many and sometimes the
principal grounds on which books purporting to be of a greater
antiquity are referred to a later age, are of a doctrinal charao
ter. That even greater weight is now attached to these
doctrinal grounds than formerly, appears from the fact that the
most fundamental defences of the genuineness of the Pentateuch
are now passed over — are not read, much less refuted. Thus,
of the three latest opposers of the genuineness of the Pentateuch,
not one has read the fundamental book of Ranke.*

But in the carrying out of the principle that only what is
within the sphere of natural agencies can be admitted to be his-
torically true, or be related by an eye-witness, a difierence is
observable. At first the principle was applied to tliat only
which most manifestly transcended those agencies, viz. miracles
and prophecies. De Wette, however, soon saw that there was no
stopping at these, that the application of the principle to the
Pentateuch, must have a far wider sweep. Thus, he makes it
proof against the truth of the history of the flood, that Noah
could not have foreseen at all that the flood would come — as
proof of the mythical character of Abraham's history, that it
is inconceivable how he could cherish the hope of being the
progenitor of a nation while his wife was barren — and just as
mconceivable that he should hope his descendants would be-
come possessors of the land of Canaan : *' For how could such

an idea have occurred to him ?" (Beitr. I. s. 63.) That nonQ

•• -• ^— ^— ^■— ^^ ■ I i^^^— »

* ViUtr$»elttmgtn wibtr den PttUateuek. Eriangen 1834. — Tk.
Vol. XII. No. 32. 39

466 Mosaic Origin of the Pentateuch. [Oct.

of the passages which speak of future evil to Israel came fron
Moses, is to him certain — " For Moses could not have enter-
tained such gloomy anticipations in regard to the iiiture fortooes
of l}is people." This kind of argumentation is in some degree
restrained within the old limits — inasmuch as it is only t bold
extension of the sentence long hefore pronounced against the
predictions of the Pentateuch. But the remark, (s. 62) * could
Abraham have been capable of such a religiousness as b as-
cribed to him in Genesis?' (comp. s. 114), manifestly goes dev
beyond those limits, and opens the way to an entirely newchss
of doctrinal arguments against the genuineness of the Pentateuch.
Nature is here regarded as much more fixed and inflexible thao
had been usual — God more entirely and exclusively confined lo
heaven, and the possibility not only of a direct and manifest in-
terposition, but also of a more silent and internal influence to
the world and in man denied him. The piety of Abraham cid-
not be explained by the laws of natural development— coas^
quently it did not exist.

Still, as long as men held fast to theism, the matter couM
not go beyond such single scattered remarks ; a consistent car-
rying through of the principle was not to be expected. On the
thei-tic ground even the denial of miracles and prophecies must
bear the charge of an interested origin and the reproach of a
guilty conscience — ^by no turnings or windings can a single a^
gument be advanced against the possibility of miracles and
prophecies. If God is, he can also act. If nature was created
by him, it must also be unconditionally subject to him, and can
offer no opposition to his agency upon it. How then can men
deny the possibility even of God's secret and internal agency
upon nature, without also rejecting all belief in a Providence,
and so pass over from Theism to Atheism or Pantheism. For,
if Providence is not an empty name, a mistaken appellation of
nature itself given to it by ignorance, what can it be but tbit
silent and mysterious influence of God upon natural causes?

But this difficulty is of late more and more put out of tbe
way. The Theism of those who do not recognize Ood la
Christy is beginning to give place to Pantheism : or rather,
Pantheism, which had only put on the garb of Theism, is begin-
ning to throw its covering aside. It is becoming more and more
acquainted with its own real character, and is purifying itse/f of
its former foreign admixtures, and shaking off the pietistic awk-
litrardnesses which before cleaved to it. Now, the carrying ibroo^

1838.] Naturalism. 467

of the principle goes on finely — It is all over with miracles and
prophecies — for who could have performed and given them ?
The truth ' our God is in the heaven ; he hath done whatsoever
he pleased,' is a syllogism, the major of which is with wicked
ioy negatived. And just so is every thing else rejected that is
beyond the operation of the fixed causes of natural development.
To bring any such thing to pass, God, who was yet in einbyro,
must have anticipated his own coming into being, which is in-
conceivable.

This advance in estrangement from God, and so in consistency,
has its representative in the book of VatJce.* When he says,
s. 185, " In the positive results of the criticism of the oldest
Hebrew traditions, here given, we have gone a step further than
the common critical view, and we assert that a consistent car'-
rying through of critical principles makes that further step
necessary" we certainly comcide entirely with him, provided,
that by critical principles be understood those adopted in the in*
terest of unbelief. But it is a question whether these are not
rather to be entirely given up ; the author has not proved the
contrary. With genuine impartiality, he assumes his pantheis-
tic ground to be correct, and then, trying the Pentateuch by the
principles of the natural formation and development of the doc-«
trines and system of religion, which he had laid down in his in-^
troduction, he makes that to be proof of the spuriousness, which
the older theology regarded as proof of the divine origin of the
Mosaic religion. After all this however, the difficulty remain-
ed that even if we transfer to the end of the Jewish history
that which occurs at the beginning, still we find nothing like it
among any other people at any stage of their religious cultiva-
tion. No nation ever attained by reason only, and in the course of
the natural development of their religious ideas, to such a system
of religion and morals. The author seeks to remove this diffi-
culty by making the difference between the religion of the He-
brews and heathenism as little as possible — and this is the easier
for him as he makes his own religious views and principles the
standard of comparison. Thus for example he says (s. 103),
'< If we compare the moral character of the Hebrews and of the
Greeks, we shall find the great difference which their religious
views exhibit greatly diminished. Not seldom even the superi^
oriiy is on the side of the Greeks ^ as is shown by their civil in-

* See Vol. XI, p. 439, note.

468 Motaic Origin of the Pentateuch. [Oct«

stitutions, in which the whole moral life of a people is oooceo-
trated." Let us show by a few quotations how the wbok
criticism of the author is filled with doctrinal assumptions, and
thus can have weight only with such as stand on the same
ground as to religion and philosophy with himself; and bow be
carries his principles through with inflexible consistency. Tbe
supposition of an original (primitive) revelation such as the
Pentateuch supports, and even noble heathen as, e. g. Plato
acknowledged, is rejected with tliese words : (s. 102.) "his
based on an extremely shallow conception of divine revelatioo,
contradicts the true notion of religion, and the relation wbicb
exists between religion and man's moral sense, which attains to
that which is perfect only after a long series of intermeditte
steps." — * Perfection is found only at the end of the prxess of
development' — this proposition which is necessar)' upon pan-
theistic principles, but absurd on all other, is used here to over-
throw the fact of a primitive revelation, and by Strauss to dis-
prove tbe reality of the person of Christ as pourtrayed io tbe
Grospels. The doctrine of a primitive revelation ' is based oa
an extremely shallow conception of revelation,' because it
makes a separation between him who reveals and him to whom
the revelation is made ; whereas, according to the new ligbt
which the philosophy of our day has received, these two are
one and the same. The trdditions about the reliron of the
Patriarchs are worthy of no credit ; — for if we concede to them
the least historical worth, we break in upon the space to be
allowed for that long series of developments which religion harf
to pass through, before it could attain that height on which,
even after we have taken away a multitude of genuine ele-
ments, and added a multitude of spurious ones, we see it stand-
ing in the Mosaic age. See s. 184. Uncritical traditioe has
ascribed to Moses many religious views and truths which the
Israelitish mind did not produce for a long series of later age$*
If we do not adopt this view of the matter, we forsake tbe
ground of natural causes and development, and so give up
ourselves. For on the pantheistic ground it is " impossible tht/
a whole people should sink suddenly and at once from a higher
to a lower degree of relit^ious culture ; audit is just as lai/wtt*-
ble that an individual should rise suddenly from a lowsrto «
higher degree, and carry along mth him in his sudden rite a
whole people. Single individuals indeed we must admit to
have had a higher form and degree of self-knowledge; but ve

1838.] Naiuralim. 46^

must not make even these entirely independent of the common
degree of attainment around them, by supposing them favored
ivith divine revelation.* We must therefore either suppose
intermediate steps and periods of development concerning
which tradition is silent, or where this is for other reasons
inadmissible, lower our estimate of the characters and attain*
ments of such individuals to the standard of their times. This
we must do particularly in the case of Moses — since on the
suppoBitian thai the accounts we have of what he did^ be even
in the main true^ both he himself and the whole course of the
Hebrew history are phenomena utterly inexplicable,^^ He
must have appeared earlier than that point in the process of
development at which such a phenomenon could be produced^
and was therefore a greater miracle than Christ himself, (s.
181 — 183.) — ^Tlie decalogue, as it now is, cannot have been
given by Moses — for the prohibition of image worship must
have originated in an age when the notion of the abstract
ideality of God had been distinctly formed. But this notion is
based on an abstraction infinitely more profound than is com*
monly supposed, and has no resemblance at all to other systems
of religion which excluded images. We cannot give the
Mosaic age the credit of a giant-step in religious truth such as
this is," (s. 233 ff.) The tenth commandment is also to be
denied to Moses. ^' For that all guilty desire of what belongs
to others should be forbidden appears to us improbable," (s.
539.) The place which one of these commandments now
occupies, probably contained originally a prohibition against

* Hengstenberg adds here in a parenthesis, *^ Solcber (offenharun*-
gen) n&nlich, die von dem werdenden GoUes ausgehen ; richtiger und
ehrlieher : einer religiosen Genialitiit.'* The design of the parenthesis
18 to remark upon the sense in which a Hegelian pantheist can use
the term ' divine revelations ;' "such revelations, namely, says Heng-
Btentierg, as come from the God in embryo (id process of develop^
ment ;) [the author might have said] more correctly and tnore kon^
e$Uy^ [by supposing them favored with] a religious genitdUyJ" This
last word is to be explained by that rendered in the text ' self-knowU
edge,' viz. selbstbewusstseyn. Both words derive all their meaning
and application to the present subject from the pantheistic theory that
<3od himself and religious truth are the development of the human
mind in a speci6c direction. The rapidity and the degree of this de-
velopment (or progress in self-knowledge) in particular cases, will be
according to the geniality or aptitude of the soul for religious improve-
ment. See on p. 468 the sentence ^ As according to Strauss," etc. — Tr.

470 Mosaic Or^in of the Pentateuch. [Oct.

feeding on mw flesh ! (s. 340.) The coromaDd < Thou sbalt love
thy Deighbor as thyself,' belongs probably to an age precedis^
tfae exile, but was certainly not given till many centuries afier
Moses. " For many intermediate steps were necessary befcie
that great principle could have been expressed in such simplidty
and universality/' (s. 425.) It is easy to see that be who
carries so far as this the principle of natural development, h»
no need to urge the matter of miracles and prophecies as was
formerly done by opposers of the genuineness of the Penta-
teuch. A public which can be expected to be so weil-dts-
posed for such doctrines, as to be ready to enter into these
subtleties as soon as they are pointed out by the author, needs
not to be referred to those obvious things which lie upon the
surface. (And the author has throughout reckoned upon well-
disposed readers — he has done nothing to convince those who
were ill-disposed. The cause of the opposition to the Penta-
teuch has, on the field of historical criticism, gained nothing by
his work.) This silence on the subject of miracles and prophe-
cies is verv significant. It shows bow far the author and bb
party are from thinking them possible. It is not worth while
any more to spend a word upon them. The belief in miracles
is based on a view of the world " long since exploded."* If
moreover this principle is carried out to such an extreme as is
done in the last two instances, then all revelation even in the
sense of the author, all religious geniality is done away. Un-
belief is here manifestly become pedantic.

The passages of the Pentateuch which speak of false gods as
having no real existence must be taken out as of a later date.
'^ For the question as to the existence of the heathen gods
belongs to the later reflexion,", (s. 232.) Just so the reconciling
and uniting of the principle of limitation (in the system of the
Jews) and that of universality, as appears in the annunciation of
blessing upon all nations through Abraham's seed, belongs to a
later age. The question, how the universality of the divine
essence could comport with his being the peculiar national God
of a small people, could not have occurred to Moses. The

* Those who think they set aside everything that does not coin-
cide with their own narrow views, with the remark, 'it is a doctrioe
DOW exploded' — ' it is obsolete' — ' it does not belong to the new coune
of development' — a mode of arguing that is getting more and more
fashionable — ought to have the scourge of keen satire shaken over
their heads.

1838.] Naturalism. 471

local unity of religious worship, the existence of an organized
priesthood, with a system of revenue, and the complicated
ritual, cannot be accounted for from the circumstances of the
people at that time ; '* these miuty if they were really establish'
ed in the Mosaic op-e, have had a higher origin^ and a pro-
phetic character, which however could be said at most only of
the Jundamental idea on which they are basedy^ (s. 216.) If
there are passages which deGnitely teach the universal sinful-
ness of man, they are to be cancelled as spurious-^for the
consciousness of a universal sinfulness of man could at that lime
have existed only in the germ ; because the objective principles
of justice and morality (des Rechtlichen und Sittlichen) must
be discovered and fully formed, long before the subjective
principles which constitute conscience can be developed and
put in operation. And in the same manner, the obiective
notion of the divine holiness, is the basis of the later formed
subjective notion of internal purity," (s. 236.) — As, according
to Strauss, the Christ of the New Testament is a production of
the religious mind of the christian church, so according to
VatJce, Moses is a production of that of the Jewish church, a
production, on the conception and formation of which a long
series of ages has labored. He gives this opinion the credit of
ascribing greater merit to the prophets,- (s. 481.) The view
hitherto entertained, that the prophetical system grew out of
the law, he overthrows at a blow ; it is opposed to the natural
course of development. To make the best modification — the
perfected form of the external and the objective (i. e. the law
as it exists in the Pentateuch,) the commencing point of the
divine administration of the theocratic state, would be to disre-
gard the relation of mediate and immediate, of revelation and
reflexion, of internal and external objectivity," (s. 227.)* By
all these operations, the author thus at length at the end of b»
investigations, arrives at the result which, at the beginning and
before any investigation, he had expressed as fixed and settled :
" Taking them all together, we come to the result that what
Moses accomplished was not itself a perfect whole, but was
only the starting point of a higher development. The dififer-

* The translator is not responsible for the obscurity of the ideas of
bis author. This sentiment will, however, be intelligible to those
who have paid attention to the developmetU'4heory, in the terms of
which this sentiment is expressed. See infra. — Tr.

472 Mosaic Origin of the Pentateuch. [Oct.

ing religious elements floating in the popular roind were not as
jet reconciled and united, even in the religious system and
•opinions of Moses himself; and consequently the conflict
between them must have continued ; and it was only gradoaUy
that the ideal principle of the system as we now see it in the
Pentateuch could pervade and modiiy the mass of views, the
rites and the moral life of the people, and form them all into t
consistent whole." It is worthy of notice that the author has
unhesitatingly and unsparingly applied to the Pentateuch the
standard of his own knowledge both of God and of sin ; — and
has thus remained true to that great principle of ' ntlgectitkjii
which is indeed (s. 6) the grand principle of the new develop-
oient, and which gives its own peculiar impress to all the new
mental life which has been waked up, in religion as well as in
morals, politics, etc. This principle is, to admit that only to be
true and valid which is supported by our own convictions —
which is only a dignifled circumlocution of the proverb, '^ What
the rustic is not acquainted with, he dislikes."* What our own
experience teaches us is here confirmed, viz. that sin is oo Jess
a mystery than grace ; and that only that spirit ' that searcbes
the deep things of God' can clear up the obscurity that coveis
the depths of man. '^ Such a form of unbelief^ the author re-
marks, (s. 187), as the Pentateuch supposes in the Mosaic a^,
is inconceivable. The sin of the people could not have been in
the will only ; there must have been a want of knowledge.
That the people were led into error by sensual enjoyments is
inconceivable. Had Moses been able to teach them the tnitb,
they would have acted in conformity to it, and they would have
abstained from all idolatry." — Such reasonings as these are
sufficiently refuted by our daily experience ; but the devotees
of the great principle of subjectivitt/y have no eye or ear for ex-
perience, for they acknowledge nothing to be true and valid but
their own convictions. Accordingly, on s. 181 a sentiment is
advanced in utter contradiction with history, but which b, to be
sure, the only consolation for the devotees of the God in em-
bryo, (des werdenden Goties) viz. that it is impossible lor a
whole people to sink from a higher to a lower grade of religious

* ** Was der Bauer nicbt kennt, das mag er nicbL" This
principle it is which Jacobi describes as the beaven-atorming Titaa
spirit of the age, which differa from that of the giants and the hokieflt
to fist-justice only that it substitutes intellectual strength for ~
Comp. Reinbold's Briefwecsbel. s. 924.

1838.J Pantheim. 413

iniprovenieot. And od s. 197, in applying this proposition, the
author asserts that the idolatries of Israel after the Mosaic times
cannot be accounted for simply from the disposition of the peo*
pie to what was external and addressed to the senses, nor from
tlie seductive neighborhood of idolatry ; but that they show that
not only as regards the people, but in the case of the lawgiver
bimseli, between whom and his contemporaries we are not to
suppose too great a difference, the religion of Jehovah had at
that time many a heathenbh coloring and admixture.

The hbtorian will smile at such assertions as these,— the
thought will immediately occur to him, that upon such principles
the first thing the historical truth of which ought to be given up
would be the French revolution with all its horrors. For how
little that event can be accounted for on the principles of Pelg-
gianism [Pantheism] is sufficiently proved by the agonizing non
putaram of so many noble characters of the time who had at
first bailed the revolution with acclamation. But the theolo-
gian lets nothing lead bim astray. Our author also was not the
first one to apply this principle — he has only carried it through
more consistently. Even Reimarus * says, in accordance with
the same principle, |[Uebrige noch ungedruckte Fragmente des
Wolfenb. Fragmentist., herausg. von Schmidt. 1787,) s. 127,
" I ask any one, if he had a brother who did all such things by
miracle — at whose word, for instance, fire fell from heaven-—
who could impart of his own prophetic spirit to seventy others—
who could command the winds, etc. — would he after all this,
and especially just when his brother had performed something
of the kind, have bad the heart and the baseness to attempt any
thing against him ?" He does not at all conceive that he him-
self has such a brother, who is infinitely higher than Moses, and
that by his own example he makes superfluous all further an-
swer to his question. Just so he says, p. 56, it is inconceivable
that Pharaoh should have hardened his heart so often — an argu-
ment which von BohUn has lately brought up again, who thinks
(p. 58) that such a weak-headed king as the Egyptian Pharaoh
could exist only in popular tales. De Wette, reasoning from
the same principles, finds in the proneness of the people in after-

* Reimarus, Profemor in the Gymnasium at Hamburfr, bom in
KM, author of * the Wolfenbtiuel Fmgments ' [Wol/etihiUUlsehe Drag*
wuntt). These Fragments were the first open and bold attack of tho
modern rationalism upon the inspiration of the Bible, and produced a
great abock in Germany. J3ee p. 475, note.— Ta.

Vol. XII. No. 82. 60

474 Mosaic Origin of the Pentateuch, [Oct.

times to the worship of idols, a testimony against the Mosik
origin of the ceremonial law. " Why," he remarks, (Beytr.
Th. 1. s. 257) ^' did the people continually iDcline after straoge
gods ? If their own religious worship bad satisGed their deare
(or a worship addressed to the senses, they certainly woold ooC
have forsaken it. But such a pomp of ceremoDial and of priests
as is established in the Mosaic books, must have sufficieDtlj
gratiGed the senses." The 'least acute observation of humto
nature — for which, however, self-knowledge is an indispeostble
foundation — would have shown him that besides the taste far
what was addressed to the senses, which the Mosaic law grati-
fied, there is another in men, which that law did not gratify,
(namely, for what is sinful,) — besides the taste for sensibleriies,
fo which God condescends, another which degrades bim. b
marriage always an infallible preventative of whoredom ? Bat
to one destitute of the knowledge of human nature, that wbicb
is most natural appears unnatural, and therefore unhbtoricil,
and so proof of the spuriousness of the book which records it.

We have thus far shown how the denial of the genuineness
of the Pentateuch was produced by an aversion for everythiBg
supernatural and unnatural. But the hostility felt and mani-
fested against this book has still other grounds. Among these
is especially prominent the fashionable doctrine as to sin and
holiness. — " As the man, so is his God," said Goethe (Wesl-
ostl. Divan, Werke Stuttgard, 1827, s. 185.) To an age
which regards sin '^ as a necessary ingredient in human natore,
as only unformed and imperfect good, as a necessary condiiioo
to the existence of virtue," to such an age the holiness and jus-
tice of God must of course be an abomination. It must seek it
any expense to rid itself of a history in which these divine attn-
butes are so very prominent. Jehovah, the high and the holy, who
visits the sins of the fathers upon the children unto the cbm/aiw
fourth generation, is now regarded as the irascible God of ibe
Jews — ^and this Jehovah is yet the God of heaven and of earth,
the enemy and judge of sin even of the present geoeratioD, as
long as the Pentateuch is genuine, and what it contains is true
history. For it is not only taught in the Pentateuch that God
is holy and just — against which it might be sufficient to say that
the doctrine is too refined for that rude age — but the doctr^
has a foundation in the history, God's holiness and justice re-
veal themselves in a series of events; and must tbeieloieoe
real, if these events be historically true. What great inflttentf

1838.] Sin and Holiness. 475

this cause has bad ia an age goveroed by the great principle of
subjectivity, is strikingly shown in the example of Goethe.
What principally led him to represent Moses as the Robespierre
of the old world is shown by himself, p. 160, when he com-

51ains of ^ the disagreeableness of the matter' of the Pentateuch,
["he thought that God sent out his destroying angel over
Egypt shocks him. It was the Israelites, according to him, who
at the instigation of Moses undertook this anticipation of the
Sicilian Vespers. '^ Even the pretended ' judgments of God'
among the Israelites were executed by a band of Sicarii led on
by Moses. Aaron and Moses were not excluded from the prom-
ised land by the justice of God, but Aaron was secretly put out
of the way by Moses, and Moses by Joshua and Caleb, who
thought it well to bring to an end the regency of a narrow-gifted
man which they had borne for some years, and to send him
after the many unfortunates he had slaughtered." On this plan
of understanding the book, its matter remains still *• disagreea-
ble ;' but it is no longer of a kind to disturb our own repose.
History is no longer prophecy. Moses, that gloomy and re-
served man, who endeavored to supply his natural want of a tal-
ent for governing by daring barbarity, is now long dead, and his
God, who was only the reflected image of himself, is gone to
the grave with him.

The denial of the genuineness of the Pentateuch, was besides
aided in its origin by dislike to its principal personages. So
long as the genuineness is allowed, that near connection with
God which the Pentateuch ascribes to them must also be ad-
mitted to have been real. For this connection was not one in
idea only, but showed itself in facts which cannot be denied if
the genuineness be admitted. But, for such a' connection with
God, the critics judged these men not at all fit. They could
not understand the essential traits of their character, because
like can be appreciated only by its like — they overlooked the
/at^A of these heroes of faith, who by it obtained a good report,
and maliciously magnified their human weaknesses, great enough
in themselves, and which in other cases are treated as inciden-
tal. It was on this ground that the Wolfenbiittel Fragmentist
in imitation of the English deists attacked the genuineness of the
Pentateuch, and the credibility of its history.* He concludes

* WbatHartmarin asserts (I. c. p. 22) is incorrect, viz, that the Frag-
mentist did not deny the genuineness of the Pentateuch, but only
brailded Moaes as a shameful impostor. Even in the first printed

476 Mosaic Origin of the Pentateuch. [Oct.

bis critique on the Patriarchs, s. 37, with these words : ** BehoU
a long series of men of one race, who seek to gain tbemsdics
wealth in their wanderings by lies, deceit, and shamefiil tiaffick,

by cruelty and oppression, by robbery and murder 1 hoU

it to be a manifest contradiction that God should have bad iate^
eourse with such impure souls, and that he should have prefab
red above others, and chosen for himself such a hateful ami
wicked race." — And that even De Wette stands essentially
on the same ground of judgment, appears from expressions like
the following (Krit. s. 123) " Finally, it is very cbancierisnc
that the Hebrews did not dislike such means, and that d)ey
even made their Jacob the model of deceit. The Greeb bid
also their Ulysses — but how much more noble and eialted i
character than this Jacob."

To all these causes must be added the incapacity of awfer-
Handing the spirit of the Pentateuch^ as also of the Bible his-
tories in general. In consequende of this incapacity, notbing
but disorder, chance, and contradiction was discovered, wheie
the enlightened eye sees order, adaptation and harmony. Iw
incapacity is shown most strikingly in the investigations on the
plan and structure of the Pentateuch. The fragmentaiy chii^
acter of this book — the inevitable consequence of wbicb is ic
spuriousness — was regarded as placed beyond all doubt.—'' b
regard to the Pentateuch," says De Wette, s. 21, "afiersonnDj
acute and profoimd investigations as have lately been made—
we may regard it as a point settled and acknowledged, that tfae
books of Moses are a collection of single compositions, origioaltj
independent of each other, and from difierent authors." Phe-
nomena, which like the change in the use of the divine names,
when correctly understood, unanswerably prove the unity of the
whole, are perverted to proofs of the very opposite by those
who occupy the ground of narrow-minded subjectivity, which b
capable of understanding nothing beyond itself. Tbis same in-
capacity had influence also m many other cases. It was oorb-
iog but this that led men to make the great chasms existing id
the history between Genesis and Exodus, and in the accouatof
the wandering in the desert, proofs a^inst the Mosaic audxf-
ship of the book — for as soon as we admit that the author (fc-

Fragment, on the passage through the Red Sea, the 9|NinoittM0«
the Pentateuch is assert«sd as decidedly as poeaihle. Viile Fng^
und AnH^fragmeniey Niimb. ]778, s. 77, 78.

1888.] PtntaUnuk tial Cat^prehended. 4T7

t signed to write $acred history, the history of the chosen racey

I time chasms appear to be a necessary consequence of his plan.

I From this same cause completeness of detail in the history b

demanded, and where this is not found complaint is made of its
looseness, betraying the non-contemporaneous author, of its
mythical character, and of its contradictions ; as soon however
as we measure the work by its own standard, it appears per-
fectly natural that the history should as far as possible select onlr
the essential events. De Wette had some idea of this truth
when he says, s. 68, '' The historian did not design such a his«-
tory of Abraham as would suit our modem students of history ;
be wrote a religious history for the religious." But De Wette
. let this thought have no further influence. From this incapaci*
ty &nally, a multitude of crude religious ideas were invented and
ascribed to the author of the Pentateuch, which if they reall jr^
existed, must overthrow its claims to a Mosaic authorship.

Now if we look at all these causes together, the doctrinal preju-
dices and the incapabilities, and reflect that as long as men were
under the dominion of the prevailing spirit of the age, from
which only the Spirit of God can make free, they were sold
under the power of all of them, it will no longer be an inexpli-
cable thing that the genuineness of the Pentateuch has been so
extensively denied. In addition to this, we must recollect that
the same pseudo-criticism which was a priori confident of the
spuriousness of the Pentateuch, producea also a perfect ttagna^
tion of inqmryy of exegetical, no less than historico-critical.
The superncialness of the Commentary of Voter is now univer-
sally acknowledged. Since him, no independent exegctksal
work on the whole Pentateuch has appeared — ^Ibr performances
like that of von Bohlen on Genesis, will not be brought forward
against this remark by those qualified to judge. The worth of
the historico-critical labors of the age upon the Pentateuch, will
in time be estimated by such assertions as, that before the cap-
tivity, no prophet quotes a passage from that book — a remark,
which better suits the levity of the author of the diction, phi-
loMoph. portal. {Voltaire)^ who makes the same p. 275, than a
German gelehrte.* No one of the opposers of the genuineness

* Let no man, Tn order to judge of the thoronghnasB of the bieto-
rieo-critical researches of late days, refer to the iimwb of apparent
eoBtradictions which they have brought to light, the traces of a later
age, aod other things incompatible with the genuineness of the hooks^
which they have carefully noted. In an Appendix to Voltaire^

478 Mosaic Origin of the Pentateuch. [Oct.

of the Pentateuch, has as yet taken the pains to make himself
thoroughly acquainted with the results of the late researches oo
Egypt. No one of them has thought it worth while to examioe
the assertion of those engaged in these researches, that these le-
sults are universally favorable to the credit of the Pentateuch.
If besides the prejudices and incapabilities, we consider also this
omission of all thorough research, it will not surprise us to beir
from young men who are just commencing their literary career,
decisions like the following : " Nothing but doctrinal coDsideia-
tions can any longer be advanced against the results of the io-
vestigations of Vater, and De Wette," {Georgey die JuiuAm
Feste, s. 6.) Against such decisions, an appeal a mak infom-
do would be most in place.

We will now attempt to exhibit the various views which
prevail in our day in reference to the Pentateuch ; and bstf

by Condorcet, (Berlin, 1791,) is found the following anecdote. — A |
Swedish traveller, who wae looking through Voltaire's Whnrj, foaod
there Calmet's Commentary on the Bible, having in it loose pspen,
on which all the difficulties noticed by Calmet were noted dowo,
without a word of the solutions which Calmet had given tbem. Tbii,
•aid the Swede, who was besides a great admirer of Voltaire, is wt
honesL Our modern critics have gone to work in exactly the tuM
vray. The author pledges himseifto prove thai every single o^feehift b
He Pentaleuchy tehich has any appearance o/plausihilHy, wu long n»a
ihe subject of the zealous invettigations qf the older theologisnt. One
has indeed no idea of this, if he does not extend his studies beyood
Voter and De Wetle. The modern criticism has nothing at all of in
own except objections like that of De Wetie, (I. c. p. 64,) "For dw
operation of circumcision some degree of surgical skill was Decem|7:
who in Abraham's camp had any such skill ? Besides, the operatioB
is very painful ; and h(Mv could Abraham expect all bis people to
undergo it? Could it have been of any importance to him wftethar
his shepherds were circumcised or uncircumcised ? " Our age bas
indeed been fruitful enough in arguments like these ; bot who doei
not see that to make them, neither knowledge, nor industry) w
thorough study, are necessary. How such arguments, which maj k
discovered indeed without a man's being exactly awake, are ws^f
in the field of profane history, is shown in the case of P. F. G* ^'f'
ler's book, 'Meine Amkht der Gesekiehte (My Views on HiAoiy), ^
field. 1814. With what a hearty laugh would the biatoriao be receive
who should bring forward De Wette's arguments against cireumetMA
by Abraham, as disproving the existence of cireumciaioB amoiV ^
Egyptians!

.^

1838.] Variout Opiniana on the Pentateuch. 479

as to its Mosaic origin ; secondly, as to the historic character of
its narratives.

As to the Mosaic origin there are three principal views :

1. The party denies the Mosaic origin altogether , or except
in regard to a few very small portions. At the head of the
party stands De Wette, who, after making some retractions in
the last edition of his Einleitung (Introduction) ^ 149, admits
only that the poetic fragments in Num. XXI, are certainly from
Moses, that among the laws many may be ancient and genuine,
though these cannot now be distinguished, and that the deca-
logue in its present shape cannot be from Moses, since we have
it in a two-fold form. With De Wette, agree Hartmann^ von
Bohlen and Vatke. This last writer even rejects the genuine-
ness of the pieces in Num.XXI, which De Wette had admitted.
Whether Gesenius is to be reckoned to this party, or to which
one he belongs, is uncertain. To judge by a remark made in
the 10th edition of his Smaller Grammar, 1831, preface : '^ it is
yet matter of controversy whether the Pentateuch was wholly
or partially written by Mos^s," he seems now to repent of the

Bisitiveness with which he supported the results ot Vater and
e Wette (in his Oeschichte d. Heb, Sprache u. Schrift--^
(History of the Heb. language and writing.) If only the fatal
miracles and prophecies, and the choleric Jewish God were out
of the way ! Then one might yield himself freely to the im-
pressions he receives as an historian and philologian. How
strong these impressions in favor of the genuineness of the
Pentateuch must be, appears from the fact that they could
not be effiiced by doctrinal assumptions of which the author,
standing where he does, could not divest himself. The ad-
mission just quoted does bis open heartedness all honor.

2. Others maintain the Mosaic origin of very considerable
and important portions of the Pentateuch, At the head of
these is Eichhom, who in the first edition of his Einleitungy
maintained the genuineness of the whole, with the exception of
a few interpolations : but in his last edition, modified his view,
so as to nraintain that the Pentateuch consists principally of
pieces written partly by Moses and partly by some of his
contemporaries, and that these were made up into one whole,
with many additions, by a later compiler, probably between
the times of Joshua and Samuel (s. 334.) The reason of this
change in his opinions was (see s. XXX VII.) that be despaired
of getting over the many difficulties which the Pentateuch

480 Mosaic Origin of the Pentateuch. [Oct.

ofiered to bis doctrinal opiaions, by mere expluittioiis. Hb
expresses th'is despair with the greatest openness (s.255);
where he says in reference to the accounts of the Egyplin
plagues : '^ If Moses the agent had himself written these
accounts, the shape in which we now have them would indeed
be a riddle." Thus the denial of the geDuiaeness goes, »i
general rule, only so far as doctrinal opinions come into play.-*
Staudlin also belongs here — who, without wishing to decide
upon the historical partSj which, as he then stood, must faiie
been as repulsive in a doctrinal point of view, as they wen
attractive in a historical, maintained with great seal the Hosne
oricio otthe laws. This he did, first, in his two Commentatiam
delegum Mosaicarum momento et ingtmo^ coUedione et efetA'
bus, Gott. 1796, 1797, aftenn^ards in his Geschichte d. Sto-
lehre Jesu, Bd. 1 . s. 1 18 ff. and finall v in the treatise, IHs
Aechtheit d* Mosaischen Oesttze vertheidgt. (The genoine*
ness of the laws of Moses defended,) in Amsnon^s und Bv*
tholdfs Journal, Th. 3. s. S25 ff. s. 337 ff. and Th. 4. s. 1
ff. s. 113 ff. where he (s. 113 ff.) declares the disoounes ia
Deuteronomy to be genuine. The candid man cleailysiv
that the hostility to the Pentateuch was based upon nn
difierent ground than that of historico-critical argument. Hk
remarks, Th. 3. $.881, ''The hatred of the BiUe cberisbed
by many of our day has undeniably prevailed extensifely io
the criticism of the Bible." He has set a good example if
making a beginning at applying the results of the late iaTeiti-
gations on ancient Egypt to the question of the genuinenesof
Che Pentateuch. He has indeed only made a beginning; ftr
he did not go to the original sources, but only made a cuM
use of what he found in Heeren^s Ideen, Tbe last tnsw
above referred to is especially useful. That he lacked a deep
and adequate understanding of the Pentateuch is indeed mav-
fcst from remarks like the following (Th. 4. s. 15) : '^ It is
certainly strange that circumcision was not practised io the
wilderness, ft was perhaps thought that while tbev were
wandering there, it would be prejudicial to health.'^ Had the
author understood the import of circumcision, and its relatioott)
the covenant, which made it improper and impossible to nSkf^
it to that reprobate race, he would have left this shallow and ex-
ternal explanation for Clerk»is and his imitators.— Hei« abo
belongs Herbst, who on account of his Obeervaiumes fseskB
de FmuL qusihmr Ubrarum posterior, audcrt et editsrs, EB*"

1838.] Various Opiniaru on the Pentateuch. 481

rangen 1817, (reprinted in t. I. of the Commentationes theoL
of RosenmiilleryFuIdner and Maurer),has been very erroneously
reckoned by some among the defenders of the genuineness of
the entire Pentateuch. After all the objections which he
makes to tlie modern criticism, he still cannot bring himself to
forsake it entirely. His reverence for the protestant-rationalist
leaders is entirely too great. He makes a low bow whenever
he mentions one of their names, and humbly begs to be pardon-
ed for his boldness in contradicting them in many things. The
fragmentary character of the Pentateuch the ngtatov yfivdog of
the modern criticism, he still holds fast. According to him,
scattered .writings of Moses were digested into one whole by
some later compiler, and furnished with additions so numerous
and important that Jahn^s hypothesis of mere glosses does not
meet the case. To avoid the repfoach of a stiidium novitatis^
he supposes this compiler to have been Ezra. In this he
thinks he has the authority of the fathers ; whose assertions
however as to what Ezra had to do with the Pentateuch have,
as we shall show at another time, an entirely different meaning
from that maintained by him, Vater, von Bohlen and others.
What the author has contributed towards the defence of what
he considers of Mosaic origin, is not important. He shows
everywhere great shallowness of explanation. Thus for ex-
ample, the difference of language between Deuteronomy and
the other books is accounted for from the long time intervening
between their composition. We do not doubt that the worthy
author, lately deceased, would, had be lived, have gone beyond
the ground taken in this treatise, which, considered as a youth-
ful work, deserves great credit. — ^Finally we must place here
Bleekj who has given us bis contributions to investigations oq
the Pentateuch in two articles, the first in Rosenmiiller's BibL
exeg. Repert. Bd. 1. Leipzig. 1824, s. 1 ff., the second in the
Studien und KritiJcen 1831. s. 488 ff. According to the
second of these, in which an important advance is observable,
the result is, that the law contained in the Pentateuch is, in its
whole spirit and character, truly Mosaic ; and that, not only in
regard to the more general moral precepts, but also in regard to
the special Levitical laws concerning sacrifices and purificatioDS,
which make so large a part of the whole ; also that the neces-
sary inference from this is that these books are in their general
character truly historical — ^that these laws suppose just such
circumstances and relations of the Jewish people as the histori-
Vol. XII. No. 82. 61

483 Mosaic Origin of the Pentateuch. [Oct.

cal parts of the books present to us, (s. 501 fil) This resak
is so much more important as it is based entirely on interoal
grounds, just where the opposers think themselves strongesL
What a different face the matter will have when to the imenal
evidences, which have thus just begun to be used in favor of
the Pentateuch, the external are also added.* A programm bf

* It is a part of the influence of the great principle of subjectWitf,
that external evidence has in these times lieea much undenralued,
and internal evidence regarded as the only valid kind of proof See
on this subject the remarks of KUineii in his Jiechtheii da Je»am,
8. LXXXVl ff. The consequence of this denial of the true relatioo
of external and internal evidence to each other, has lately been illos-
irated by some striking cases. If Hamakerj Gejentiv, aod otberabsd,
at lirst, and before going any further, required the French If aiquis is
show the stone with the inaeripHo nvper in C^renaica rq^eria^ wbick
he pretended to have in bis possession, then the relation of lauffoiiy
and being laughed at, would have been exactly reversed. GeseaittS
would then have at once discovered what he first perceived posf/effiia»
that the pretended Phoenician language of the inscription was norbtnf
but Maltese- Arabic gibberish. Had Gesenius, instead of inquirinf
how the proper names in the pretended Sanehoniathon agreed with
those in bis Phoenician inscrifKions, insisted upon seeing ibe Greek
manuacript of Sanehoniathon, he would not have found ic neeessaiy
to confess, (in the Preuss. Staats-Zeitung,) after painftil experieoei^
that it is very dangerous to rely upon internal evidence alone. May
this experience produce some fruit also for bis biblico-critical labon ;
and this the rather, because it was in this department that be formed
the bad habit which has |)roved so fatal to him in that of proftne lite-
rature.

It would be no more than right, for those who in regard to the Bi-
hle pronounce at once their decisions, grounded upon internal eri-
dence alone, to try their infallibility of judgment on anonymous prs-
ductlons of the present day, which aflbrd also much more niateriah
for proof of this kind. The author knows beforehand how ihef
would succeed, from the great experience he baa bad in connection
with the paper which he edits. The latest case is that of Pro£ Baor,
who with such confidence, and against all external evidence, denies the
Epistles to the Philippians, Timothy, and Titus, to be PaulV, and
those ascribed to Peter to be his, and with the same coijfideoca
ascribes to the editor the article *'on the future character of our the-
ology," referring to the manifest coincidence of ideas with those of the
introductory remarks. And now first, after the author has made the
assurance that the article does not belong to him, will the acute criiie
peroeiva the difference of style and other characteristics^ between i^
JMtiele and those remarks. A very striking proof of ^ dseepii^^

i83d.] Variaui Opinions on the Pentateuch. 483

Bleek against von Boblen, said to have lately appeared, the
writer has not yet seen.

3. Others maintain the genuineness of the Pentateuch in its
present form. Many however admit scattered glosses of a later
date, and others suppose more important interpolations to have
been made. Among these last John especially goes so far as
to. expose his cause to its opposers. It needs not to be men«
tioned, after the historical development made in the preceding
pages, that all these defenders of the genuineness, however
they may differ in their ecclesiastical connections, theological

nesa of ioteroal evidence is afforded by the book K. L. Reiohold's
Leben und Lit. Wirken, von E. Reinhold, (Jena, 1825). It is there
said, 8. 16U ** Scarcely had the work * Kritik der Offeubariing' ap-
peared, (in Konigsberg, spring of 1792, anonymous,) when it was an-
nounced in the Intelligenzblatte der Allg. Lit. Zeitung, with the re-
mark, ^ Every one who has read even the smallest of those writings
by whieh the Konigsberg philosopher [Kant] has acquired immortal
merits as a beneiactor of the human race, will at once recognize the
great author of this work.' Hufeland, Prof, of Jurisprudence at Jena,
and associate editor of the A. L. Z., made the same assertion in a re*
view written with great warmth, A. L. Z. 1792, Nr. 190, 191. When
now Kant announced in the Intelligenzblatte of that paper, Nr. 102^
that the author was Fichte, a candidate of theology, who was for a
short time in the preceding year at Konigsberg, Hufeland iu the In-
telligenzblatte d. A. L. Z. 1792, Nr. 133, declared by way of explana-
tion, that all the lovers of Kant's philosophy at Jena, including eight
academical teachers, as well as almost all friends and enemies of this
philosophy in Germany, had bad the same opinion of the book, tie-
cause of its coincidence with Kant's writings nut only in style but the
whole train of thought. Fichte afterwards wrote another anony-
mous book, Beytrag zur Berichtigung der Urtheile iiber die Franz.
Revolution." According to a letter which he wrote to Reinhold, he
had no fear of being discovered as the author, ''since not one of our
critics will ascribe the language of that book to the author of the
work OB revelation." ** I confidently expected," he continues, ** that
this argument would be used, if the publisher should give any hints
about the true author, and I have not been mistaken. O that the un-
eertainty of this source of reasoning might, or rather, for the sake of
the ineogniio of well-meaning writers, that it might not be discovered.
As Kant was not author of the book on revelation, I was charged
with skilfully imitating his style — now I should be charged with
skilfully dissembling my own ; and yet I suppose I could write ^ye
or six other books on different subjects, in no one of which any of our
common judges of style could fiud the style of the preceding ene» and
that without my having this in the least in view when writing them

1^

484 Mosaic Origin of the Pentateuch. [Oct.

views, or internal religious character, yet all agree hi being
supematuralists. A historian might still hold to the genuiDeoes
without being a supernaturalist — not so the theologian ;— for he
could not possibly avoid the theological consequences at Htm
opinion.

At the head of this party stands J. D. iUicAaeKi.wbo mhis
Einleitung ins A, T. s. 171 ff. shows at length, that the
opposers of revelation roust necessarily deny the genuineoessof
the Pentateuch. The opposition to the genuineness, vbicb
was not fully developed till after his defence of it, foond its
first able antagonist in John partly in his I^rUeitung (Intro-
duction to Old Testament,) and partly in two treatises la
Bengel's Archiv. Bd. 2, 3. He has been lately joined by two
worthy followers of his own church, the acute Hugh the two
treatises, * Extras zur OesctUchte des Sam* Pent.* Heft 7;
der Freih, Zeiischrift. s. 27. ff. and ' UtUersuchung iber da
Alter der SchreibJcunst bet den Hebraen ;' and Movers, in the
article, ' Uber die AuMndung des Gesetzbuches unter Joitof,
etc' in the Zeitschrtft fur Philos, u. Katk. TJleo/., Heft 12,
Koln, 1834, s. 79 ff. and Heft 13, s. 87 ff. The roost im-
portant part of this last article is the proof of Jeremiah's and
Zephaniah's acquaintance with the Pentateuch shown from
prophecies of theirs uttered before this discovery of the book of
the law by Hilkiah.* Of the evangelical Church of Gennany
are to be mentioned the following : Kelle in his * vorurtheik'
freien Wurdigung der Mos. Schrifient 3 Hefte Freib.jlSll,
(not important); Fritsche^ in his ^ Prufung d. Grvndtwit
denen neuerUch die Aechtheit d. Bucher Mosis bestritten
worden ist^' Leipz. 1814, (superficial) ; Sche^j in the
* Untersvchuftgen Uber Btbel u, Kirchengeschichte/ Th. I.
Bresl. 1816, s.6l.ff. ; Kanne, in his 'Bibl. Auskgungen,'^-
1819, where are found (Th. I. s. 79 ff.) remarks against
Voter's treatise, (Th. 2. s. 1 ff.) against De Vfeiie's BeitT^y
and (s. 72 ff.) remarks against yater continued. Tlie auibor
touches only single points, especially alleged contradictions and
marks of a later age, and with much that is ai-bitrary, has some
good things ; — Rosenmueller, in the 8d edition of his Commen-
tary on the Pentateuch, who is so bashful and timid with his super-
natu(%lism, that only once where he can get along in nooticr

• The theory of many, namely, is, that the Pentateuch biui i»e^*
been known before this production of it by the prieit HilkiHii duriog
the reign of Josiab.— Ta.

1838.] Various Opiniani on the Pentateuch. 48&

way, be yentures to say that the author obtained aliunde the
information which he bad no means of knowing himself; Sack
in his Apologetxk s* 156 ff., who saw that the defence of the
genuineness of the Pentateuch must be based on the overthrow
of the hypothesis of its fragmentary character, and pointed out
some evidences against the mythical character of the work,
hitherto overlooked, especially the intrinsic truth observable xxy
the representation of the different characters, such as no mythi-
cal work can show ; that '^ the character of Moses, for example^
appears always exactly the same, from his first judicial act, to
his laying down the judicial office ;" Ranke^ in bis Untersuch'
ungen ueber den PentoteucA, (Eriangen, 1834, Th. 10 the best
work on the genuineness that has yet appeared ; Uettinger,
who in his article on Gen. 4: 1 — 6,8, in the jKibing. Zeitschrifij
(1835, Heft, 1. s. 1 ff.), ably shows that the charge of want of
connection and of a legendary character, has its origin, especially
in the case of this passage, in indolence and superficialness ;
finally the Licentiate JBauer, in his treatbe Der Mosatscher
Ursprung der Oesetzgebung des Pent, vertheidigt, in the
Zeitschr. fur speculat. Theoh 1, 1, (Berl. 1836), s. 140 C
Of the writings of foreigners, only such belong here as are con-
nected with the researches of the Germans. Here are to be
mentioned, besides the work of the Danish bishop HertZy
^ Spuren des Pent. in. d. Buechemd. Konige,^ Alt. 1822, only
the two works of Pareau, Institutio interpretis V. T. (Utr.
1822,) and ' Disputatio de Mythica sacri codicis interpreta-^
tumey (Utr. 1824.) The latter work especially deserves the
most careful attention, which however has in Germany been
carefully denied it.

The second difference above mentioned, related to the his--
torical character of the accounts of the Pentateuch. It exists
among those who agree in rejecting everything supernatural,
and also with few exceptions in denying the Mosaic origin of
the Pentateuch. Some of them endeavor to save, out of that
part of the Pentateuch which is not opposed to their opinions^
as much as possible for true history. They asserted the prin-
ciple, without qualification, that whatever transcended the natu-
ral course of things was mythical ; everything else approached
the character of credible history : (Meyer, Apohgie der. Ge-
schichtl. AuffassungdesPent.,Su\zh.\8\lfS.lS). SoEichhomy
Bauer, Meyer, Bertholdt, and Oesenius, if we may judge from his
mannerof citing the Pentateuch. The transition to the other view

466 MmoU Origin of the PentaUiwch. [Oct.

was commenced hj Voter ^ who did not indeed set himself in de-
cided and uniform opposition to the historical character of the ac-
counts of the Pentateuch, and yet satisfied himself geoenllf
with a simple *• perhaps' in favor of a historic basis for thetn,
and, by always carefully insisting that nothing certain could be
determined on the matter, maintained a position entirely skepti-
cal. But the opposite doctrine was fully developed by Ik
Wette^ who asserted (See the results, Kritik, s. 397. ff.) that
the Pentateuch had no historical character at all — it eontaiui
not one fixed historical point — all was mythical— and natkaif
but the want of metre had denied it the character ofpoUnf
which really belonged to it, De Wette is ii^owed in this i^
Baury von Bohlen, VatTce* and others.

That this latter hypothesis has, over the other, the advaotige
of consistency , that one who takes the mythical ground can
avoid it only by determining arbitrarily what is, and what boot
history, is so plain that it needs no proof. But that the fcnner
one could nevertheless arise, that it can maintain itself after the
, other has been formed, and after glaring proof of its own aiti-
trary character, that it continually finds favor anew, and is
adopted in particular cases even by those who strictly and &h
tirely reject it in^ principle — all shows how deeply the Penta-
teuch is stamped with the impress of an historical character,
and so serves as evidence against the mythical interpretatioos
of it in general. This cause of the origin and long duntioo of
an hypothesis which thus stops on half-way ground, is given by
Meyer himself one of its advocates (1. c. p. 16 :) " These

* How far this last writer goes, is shown by amertioos like the follow*
iiig : The book of Genesis affords so little historical material, tbtf it
does not even determine the native laud of the Patriarchs, (l c 164);
the relation of Aaron to Moses is to be rejected as unhistorical (&237);
the Mosaic state has not a historical character (s. 904 £) ; Mo§e> did
not establish a connected system of religious worship, and consecrattd
no race of priests for it (a. 218) ; it is doubtful whether the Lefite*
were originally a tribe in the same sense as the other tribes (%. ^l)i
doubtful whether ihe original names of the tribes have comedoirnio
us (s. 223). Of holy seasons, he allows only the sabbath and periw|M
the new moon to have been ancient ; the three great feasts origioiwl
in a later age, and still later was the reference given them to the w*
cient history of the people, etc. etc. The author has only to take ose
step more, viz. with Voltaire (questions s, Pen^fdoptdU $ 1^ ^
call upon his opponents to prove that such a roan as Mooistovtf
existed.

1838.] Varioui Opimans on the Pentateuch. 487

mythical coromentators had yet an obscure feeling, which was
produced as well by the whole individual character of some of
these ancient traditions, as their definite references to time and
place, and their close connection with some later and better
established facts, which feeling forbade them to regard every
thing as mere fable which they were compelled to explain as
mythical." The completion and the carrying out of the
thoroughly mythical hypothesis, is then to be regarded as a
gratifying advance, for the very reason that it stands in such
glaring contradiction with all sound historical feeling ;•«— for it is
a general truth that every error must be fully carried out and
driven to its extreme before there will be a reaction towards
truth. We may rejoice so much more unreservedly at this ad-
vance, since that which the half-mythical hypothesis had
suffered to remain, was not the sacred but the common history ;
so that in a religious point of view, nothing is lost or gained by
it. But the thoroughly mythical hypothesis might, and indeed
with some justice, take the credit of restoring to religion her
violated rights, inasmuch as she placed a sacred poesy in the
stead of common history. See for instance De Wette's remark
(s. 67) in reference to Eicbhorn's opinion that circumcision was
intended to remove Abraham's unfruitfulness : '' What would
our pious old theologians say at this ! Truly they were theolo-
gians, we are not." And (s. 1 16) in reference to Isaac's get-
ting his wife : " A Hebrew read this narrative as poetry, as
connected with his religion and the theocracy, and with a
mythical faith — shall we read it otherwise ? Shall we destroy
and strip off the delicate poetical flowers by a fruitless, tasteless
historical handling ?" Were this eilbrt to substitute a sacred
poesy in the place of common history really an earnest one,
this thorough-going mythical hypothesis must be regarded as a
forerunner of the tmth in still another way. If the spirit of
the book, so long mistaken and denied, is again restored to its
rights, the history must also gain something. If the history
regarded as poetry, excites religious feeling, touches, edifies,
men will do longer be so estranged from it, and the way is
open to the adoption of the history as history. For human na-
ture cannot be satisfied simply with ideas or what is ideal ; but
has an innate irrepressible desire to see them realized in history
—for only when the ideal becomes real history, can it be an
aasuraace to us that (Sod is not far off, that he kindly conde-
scends and reveals himself to man, and that a holy life is possi-

488 Shsaic Origin of the Pentaieud^, [Oct.

ble ID this world of sin. But although the principal cbao|Mi
of the mythical interpretation (De Wette) does sometimes doi
little towards fulfilling his promise [in the last quotadoo above]
«s e. g. in his remarks on the offering up of Isaac (s. 103) nd
in his discussion against the crude deduction of the doctriDeof
•angels (s. iOS}) yet in the general, in direct contradictioo ioIbs
promise, his effort is only to change common history into con-
4iion poetry. The good taste which one obiainM by readiof
the classic poets must be brought unth him to the reading of
the Hebrew writers (s. 82). — The mythos cooceniiDg die
cursing of Canaan is very awkwardly conceived, a producuos
of the national hatred of the Hebrews for the people tbej U
<:onquered (s. 76). — Abraham's intercession for Sodom does do
great honor to the taste of the narrator (s. 92). — ^The aocamt
of Lot's daughters is a pure fiction, of a very tasteless and invidh
ous character (s. 94.). — He speaks also in Th. l.s. ^9,o[
* sacred legends' and ' moral tirades.'

There is also a difference among those who embrace die
thorough-going mythical interpretation of the Pentateucb, iotf*
much as some, like De Wette, satisfy thenudots wukj/JSsg
down, and actively protest against all building up again; othefl
will also build up, as for instance Baur and Vatke. (For fiov
see his article * ueber d. Passah/est u, ueber d, Bescknahsg,
Tueb. Zeitsch.f. Theol. 1832, Heft 1. s. 40 ff). A spirit of
fare boldness is necessary in order to do this ; such as cooU
scarcely be found in the department of profane history. Ikt
every one sees that without stone, nothing but castles ia thetf
can be built. But there are also there none but common histo-
rians. The philosophical historian has the principles in aoconi-
ance with which history must develop itself. But neceuUjtt'
dudes and proves reality. Why then should special testimooies
be still needed to prove what has really taken place ? Tbejiff
in fact only a hindrance, and we must be glad when we bin
none of them. For where we have, they do not in the geocni
agree with those principles, and we then have the trouble of
modifying, transforming, adapting, and setting them aside. For
that the principles may not be modified so as to suit tbefit^t
is clear enough. Every such contradictbn, that is based only
on testimonies as to facts, is, for ^ science,' and these its pnests,
of no sort of importance. (See Vatke, s. VII.) C«wj*
criticism can only kill ; philosophical critk^ism can abo we

1838.] Variau$ Opiniofu on the Pentateuch. 489

alive. It has all within Jtself, and proclaims aloud, ^ I anii and
there is none besides me."

The opponents of the genuineness of the Pentateuch are di-
vided still further in this, that some of them ascribe a very con-
siderable agency in the formation of the Pentateuch, and its in-
troduction as a sacred book, to design and deception; others
endeavor to avoid this supposition as much as possible. As this
supposition of deception is unavoidable on the ground of the an-
tagonists of the Pentateuch, as is hereafter to be shown, it is a
testimony in favor of the Pentateuch^ that the most endeavor to
escape it, or at least (a proof of a bad conscience)try as much
as possible to conceal it. See for example De tVettej Bd. I.
a. 178 ffl Bd. 2. s. 405 fT. Vatke also, however he may gener-
ally seek to avoid the supposition of a fraudulent forgery, some-
times admits it. See for example s. 220, where he says Jere-
miah charged the priests with it. Only Gramberg {Geschichte
d, Religionsideen Th. 1. s. 63,) and t;. Bohlen adopt with
shameless openness the supposition of deception.

Finally, the views of the opposers of the genuineness of the
Pentateuch, on Me relation of the different books to each other,
on the time when each book was written, and the time when the
whole was collected together and received as the work of Moses,
offer to us a whole host of varieties. (The opinion defended
by De JVette, viz. that Deuteronomy was the latest of all the
books, and is the mythical key-stone of the mythical whole, an
opinion which appeared to have gained universal assent, is now
beginning to give place to )ust the opposite one, that Deuter-
onomy is the very oldest of the whole. See e. g. George, 1. c.
p. 7 ff.) The great principle of * subjectivity,' here celebrates
its triumph. No two of the more important critics agree in
their mode of solving the most important problems. It is a war
of every man against every man. We had intended to present
to the view of our readers the laughable spectacle of these con-
tests, in order that from the confusion and contradiction of the
positive results of the later criticism, which is consistent with it-
self no further than its champions are united by a common doc-
trinal interest, they might form some conclusion about the
boasted certainty of their negative results. But we feel an un-
conquerable disgust at the business, and we cannot bring our-
selves to enter upon the field of arbitrary speculation, and col-
lect together the masses of fancies that lie scattered there.
Every one can easily supply this lack by taking in hand a few

Vol. XII. No. 32. 62

490 Mosaic Origin of the Pentateuch, [Oct.

of the works on this subject, and comparing them together.
The impression made by such a labor would be apt to resemhfe
that which one gets on visiting a Jews' school.

The Prospect for the Future.

The result of the history of opposition to the Pentateuch jost
given, is by no means cheering to its defenders. If that oppo-
sition has its deep and fixed root in the spirit of the age, if tbey
who do homage to that spirit, must and will continue their op-
position, even after all their arguments, which are not based simp-
ly on their doctrinal views, have been refuted, and after the geno-
ineness of the Pentateuch has been most plainly proved, tbeo
may a man well say, after having laboriously and in the sweit
of his brow accomplished the work, I have labored in vain, iiid
spent my strength for nought. But, if on one side the pros-
pect is dark, on the other it is clear and bright. Not all have
sold themselves unconditionally to the service of the spnit of ibe
day. Many are not disinclined to let the doctrinal principles of
the two parties be for the present more or less unaecided, tod
first to inquire which of them conquers on the field of historicil
criticism. It is these homines bonae voluntatis firom whom the
true laborer may expect his reward. And there is at the pre-
sent time another encouraging circumstance. Originally the at-
tacks on the Old and the New Testaments went hand in band.
Both opposers and defenders had no other idea but that bodi
must stand or fall together. The Wolfenbiittel Fragmentistibr
example looked upon the whole sacred history as a dasdj
formed phalanx ; and acted on the supposition that with the
passage through the Red Sea, he would annul the resurrectioB
of Christ, and with the resurrection also the passage through
the Red Sea. Bauer wrote a Mythology of the Old and Hew
Testaments. De Wette declared openly that the Mythical
principles which he had applied to the Pentateuch must also be
applied to the New Testament. And how could it be o(he^
wise ? The connection between the Old and New TestameDB
is so intimate and so manifest that every child sees it. The
New continually refers back to the Old. How can the Ibrtj-
years' temptation of the children of Israel in the wilderness be
mythical, and the forty-days temptation of Christ which ansveis
to it, be historical ? the appearances of angels in the Old Testa-
ment mythk^al, and those m the Gospeb historical^ when the aa-

1838.] The Protpedfar the Future. 491

gels in both are exactly the same even to their names ? the
miracles of the Old Testament mythical, and those of the New
historical, when these last are almost entirely of the same kind,
and in their symbolic meaning are based entirely on the Old
Testament ? Truly, such a transition from fiction to truth, such
an apeing of what is human by that which is divine, would be
the greatest absurdity imaginable. But the active zeal of those
concerned was successful for some time in concealing from them-
selves and others the manifest absurdity. Religious feeling had
awaked anew, bqt with many not in such strength, as that they
could break entirely with the spirit of the age. Their religious
feeling made it impossible for them to give up the New Testa-
ment ; their adherence to the spirit of the age, to receive the Old.
For a short time this seemed to go very well : all warning voices
were drowned, or even derided and reviled. Then appeared
Strauss^s Leben Jem (Life of Jesus), and the intrinsic connec-
tion of what had been arbitrarily and interestedly separated
could be no more denied. The critical course which Strauss
took with regard to the Gospels is so entirely the same with
that of De Wette in regard to the Pentateuch, that one can hard-
ly see how it is possible to give up here, and still hold on there ;
especially as Strauss has used great industry in showing that the
Old-Testament element, is so considerable in the New, that he
who has given up the Old, must also bring himself to reject the
New. Just now therefore it is a favorable moment for the de-
fenders of the Old Testament, and especially for those who are
laboring to free the foundation with which the whole stands or
falls from the rubb'ish which covers it : for, those who held on
to the New Testament on a deeper principle, that of true faith^
will now, when the great alternative is placed before them (pi
adopting the Old Testament, or rejecting both), free from tne
indifference and aversion they have hitherto felt toward the Old
Testament, lend as willing an ear to its defenders as they have
hitherto done to its opposers. And how much soever individt
uals may resist this fatal necessity, the matter will soon come
back again to its old position, and there will be left only one
great difference viz, between believers and opposers of the
Bible.

492 Critical Notices. [Oct.

ARTICLE IX.

Critical Notices.

1. — Scriptvrae Linguaeque Phoenieiae Monumenta qvotquol aqier*
sunt ediia et inedita ad caUographarum optimorumque exm-
plorumjidem edidil^ addiiisque de Scripiura el lAngsaFhatr
nicum commentariis^iUlustravU GuI. Gesenius. Lipsiae, 1637.
pp. 481 to.

It is well known that Gesenius, some time since, turned aside
from the Hebrew Thesaurus to the investigation of the PhoeniciMi
language, with the special design of studying its relations to the He-
brew. This work is the fruit of his studies. It consists of a qoarto
of nearly 500 pages of text, and another thin quarto, contaioing 76
lithographs of alphabets, coins, inscriptions, etc., very neatly doi»
Great interest has long been felt in the study of tliesc remains of sn-
tlquity. But little progress, however, has hitherto been made io at*
tempts to arrange them and to decipher their meaning. This has
been owing to several reasons ; one has been a want of the necessary
aids to the study. The remains themselves, as well as the commeo-
taries of learned men upon them, are contained in so many works,
some of them expensive ones, and widely scattered over maflj
countries, that they could not be collected together without much
labor and expense. Besides, the fac similes of the inscriptions are
not accurately edited. Some were negligently taken from auto-
graphs of little or of no authority. Those editions of the remains
whose integrity and fidelity no one could doubt, are bo arranged,
that one who should confine his attention to the figures, would lose
bis pains. In the third place, we have wanted a full and critical
exposition of Phoenician palaeography, exhibiting at once the obser-
vations of former writers, arranged in proper order, and the rcsulo
of as many new investigations as possible, filling up the imweoss
lacunae in this subject left by former writers, and thus laying more
stable foundations. The renewed dispute respecting the nature of
the Phoenician and Punic dialect, has been a great impediment to
progress in these investigations. Bochart and many others have
supposed that the Phoenician language, with a few excepft'ous, iras
identical with the Hebrew. The late learned Hamaker calls this a
perverse and rash opinion, and attempts to show that the Phoenician
is composed of forms from all the Semitic dialects.

Such being the circumstances in which this subject is placed, Ge-
senius has attempted to give, in a regular digest, all the monifto^^
edited or inedited, which have survived the wreck of Plwenician llt^

1838.] Phoenician language. 493

rature. Spurious and doubtful remains are rejected. If new monu-
inentB, or more perfect copies of those which now exist, should be
discovered, these can be appended in a supplement to the present
work. In the second place, the author has taJken great pains to give
the most perfect copies of the existing remains, corrected where it
could be done, by the original autographs. About eighteen months
were spent by the author, in London and Leyden, in examining and
copying some very important relics. Special pains were also taken
to ascertain the value of the Phoenician remains in Paris, Italy, Sicily,
Malta, Athens, Egypt, North Africa, etc. In the third place, m-
stead of giving a prominent position to a delineation of palaeography ,^
special pains have been taken with the commentaries on the remains
themselves. In addition to the remarks on the Numidian and Phoe-
nician letters, particular attention has been given to the subject of the
Libyan letters, which have hitherto been nearly unknown, and in il-
lustrating whose origin and history palaeographists may now employ
their talents. Again, the agreement between the remains of the
Phoenician, Punic and Numidian dialects and the Hebrew is point-
ed out, while what have been regarded as'Arabisms, Syraisms,
Samaritanisms, etc., are shown to rest on a false interpretation of the
examples. Ail the remains of these dialects, of every age, are col-
lected and arranged in proper order. Great labor has been bestowed
on this part

From these investigations, some valuable light has been drawn for
the illustration of sacred and profane studies. The mode of writing
the Hebrew language, and the reasons for some of its usages, may be
rendered more certain. The Aramaean-E^ptian literature, which
was as it were the origin and cradle of written language, is here
placed very clearly before us. Certain Hebrew words, and those of
rare occurrence in the Old Testament, are explained by the more
firequent use of the same in the Phoenician. The pronunciation and

Sammatical conformation of the Hebrew, which is contained in the
asoretic points, are greatly confirmed by the pronunciation of the
Punie language.

We must here dose our account of these interesting volumes, by
givinfl a brief synopsis of the contents. Book J. Phoenician Palae-
ography. Literary and bibliographical history, time and countries
in which the Phoenician language was used, Phoenician and Nu-
midian alphabet, the Aramaean-Egyptian mode of writing, varioua
kinds of writing which took their rise from Phoenicia, numeral signs.
Book 11. Inscriptions found at Malta, Athens, Sk^ily^ Sardinia, Car-
^R^) Egypt, etc. Book III, Phoenician coins. Book 1 V, Phoe-
nician langua^. Nature and history of the language, remains of
the language m inscriptions and coins, remains in Greek and Roman
writers, Phoenician and Punic grammar. Various appendices and
UMSkses close the work.

494 Cniical Notices. [Oct.

2. — Prohus: or Rametnthe TMrd Century. InLeUertfromlmm
M. Fiso from Rome^ to Fausta the daughter of Grmdm M
FaUntfrcL New Yoric: C. S. Francis. — ^Boston: JoBepkE
Francis. 1838. 2 vols. 18mo. pp. 257, 250.

These volumes, written, as we learn, b^ the Bey. WilUamWoe,
late of New York city, are a continuation, m some sort, of the Letten
from Palmyra, briefly noticed in the Repository Vol XL p.5Qi
The latter describe Palmyra and its fortunes under Zenobia, aodths
victories of Aurelian which resulted in the eclipse of that spleodiii
star in the east. A great variety of interesting infonnation b oofr
municated touching contemporaneous manners, customs, ails, «>
ences, religions, etc., invested in a style of finished elegance. Inilie
character of the Jew, Isaac, the Old Testament faith is attempted to
be delineated, and in the character of Probus, the persecuted religioB
of Jesus. In the volumes before us, we recognize the same gnplse
powers of description, the same accurate knowledge of classicBJ uA
ecclesiastical afiairs, the same loAy spirit, and the saipe pure and
beautiful style. There are some passe^es of great power, in vUck
the author succeeds in throwing the deepest interest into his i»r»
tive. The characters of Macer, Pronto and Aurelian, are dim
with remarkable distinctness and individuality. The unotfemhie
abominations and the horrible cruelties, which were the sport aodlbe
every-day business of the Bomans in the decline of the empire, an
laid bare by this powerful writer. As in the former case, howerer,
so here, we do not recognize the Christianity of the primitiTe ages.
It is not, if we can judge, the religion which boims on eyeiy pigeof
the New Testame^nt At least, some of the main features of this le-
ligion are wanting. The doctrine of the divine unity and of the in*
mortality of the sbul are fully recognized. But we do not see as
atoning and dwi/ne Saviour. It is ^^ Jesus of Nazareth," "a prophet
and messenger 6f God,'' " a great moral and relieious reformer, efr
dowed with the wisdom and power of the supreme Uod," " aneiainple
of what should afterwards happen to all his followers," etc.* l<*
** the great God our Saviour," " the God over all blessed fij
ever,'' '^ the true God and eternal life," that animate and dignirf
the writings of Paul and of ickoL It was not by any meaiis the ^
trines of natural religion which strengthened the first Christian ntf-
tyrs to meet calmly the pincers, the wheel, the lions, and theais»
It was faith in a crucified and almighty Bedeemer, who had washed
them from their sins in his own blood, and who l»d saved themfaa
eternal perdition, which filled their soda with holy saieodj m^
their limbs were torn asunder. The volumes have grest bleitfT

* See the Defence which Probas made before Aaieliaii, Vol. 11. PP- 1^'"
160.

1838.] Statistical JoutTial 495

merit We are sorry that we must consider the Christiaiiity devel-
oped in them to be fundamentally defective.

3. — Journal of the Statistical Society of London. No. 11. June, 1838.
pp. 64. No. 111. July, 1838. pp. 70.

The first article in the June No. of this work is on the statistics of
the copper mines in Cornwall, by sir Charles Lemon. Previously to
A. D. 1700, the copper ore produced in Cornwall was principally, if
not wholly, from the tin mines, or at least from mines orifpnally
worked for tin. The number of persons employed in the mines in
1897, is calculated to have been 28,000. Between one third and
one half are women and boys. About 60,000 tons of coal are an-
nually consumed at the mines. The wages of the people employed
in 1^7, in the copper mines and in the tin and copper, (so far as the
copper is concerned,) were about ^416,000. The annual consump-
tion of gunpowder is about 300 tons. The total ores of the county
of Cornwall are, on an average, about 128,000 tons. The number
of male deaths, between the ages of ten and sixty, in the three great
mining parishes, (Gwennah for 18 months, Redruth for 7 years, Ulo-
gan for 5 years,) was 452. Of these, 52 were from mine accidents,
and 242 from diseases of the chest ; the latter caused almost entirely
from the efibrt of ascending from the fi^eatest depths with exhausted
strength. Both these causes of mortaUty are in the process of being
removed.

The sixth article is on the mortality of amputation, by B. Phillips
F. R. S. The amputations included in the table below, are those of
the arm and leg. The whole of them have been performed within
the last four years, in civil hospitals, and in the private practice of
hospital surgeons.

Cbmi. Dwiha.

France, 203

47

or

23.15 percent

Germany, 109

26

23.85

United States, 95

24

25i26

Gi«at Britain, 233

53

22.74

640 150

The ninth article contains some statements derived from the an-
nual report of the statistical society of Saxony, presented Dec. 22,1837.
The Directory of the society collects, arranges, and enters into jour-
nals, registers, and other books for this purpose, all accurate infor-
mation which would be serviceable to the State, The fects are
aAerwards methodically transferred to separate ledgers, each ap-
propriated to an especial subject ; and those of peculiar importance,
which present information directly useful to the public, are extracted
and laid before the ministers of the government ; while those of more
genenl utility receive publicity in the pages of periodicals.

496 Critical Noticet. [Oct.

In a subsequent article, we have some very valuable statkticiflB
the subject of intoxication as the source of crime. Between Odober,
1832, and July, ISSTT, just 1000 persons were confined in the jsOai
Preston for felonies. Of these, 455 or 451 per cent arose ism
drunkenness directly connected with crime.

The first article in the July No. is on the sickness and oiorlaliiy
among the British troops in the West Indies. The number of whitB
troops employed on the Leeward command during the 20yeaisfno
1817 to 1836, has varied from 3265 to 5462, the average being 4331
Of this force there died in 20 years, 7869, being about 85 per lOOO
of the strength annually, or nearly six times as many as arooogtbB
same class of troops in Great Bntain, where the mortality is 15 per
1000 annually. Some very valuable remarks are made oq the
healthfulness of different islands. Tobago is the most remaibbls
for fever, Dominica for diseases of the bowels and the braio, Bsr-
badoes for those of the lungs, Grenada, for those of the liver, wfaOs
Trinidad is noted for its dropsies.

The second article is on the relative frequency of pulmonij
consumption and diseases of the heart in Great Britain, bj Join
Clend inning M. D., a hospital surgeon in London. Out of a total of
520 to 530 cases examined, from 170 to 180, or about 33 percent
were cases of disease of the heart. The doctor is inclined to dink
that there may be considerable exaggeration in respect totbe opioioB
of the number of deaths by pulmonary consumption. — Among tto
other important articles in this number are observations oo em-
gration from the United Kingdom, on schools in Massachusetts, oi
the poorest class in Glasgow, etc.

4. — Meditations on the Last Days of Christy consisting of ifnur^
monsy preached at Constantinople and Odessa. By WiBtM
G. Schauffler, Missionary of the A. B, C. F. M. Boston: Wil-
liam Pierce, 1837. pp. 380.

The subjects of these Meditations are, Christ^s entrance into Jen-
salem ; Father, glorify thy name ; the great passover ; Christ s
Gethsemane; capture, arraignment and condemnation of Chm;
behold your king; the scene of Golgotha; the penitent thief ooihe
cross ; the burial of Christ ; the great morning ; the walk to &>-
maus; the great evening; Thomas's conversion ; meeting at tbc«*
of Tiberias ; meeting of the five hundred brethren ; and the tscea-
sion of our Lord.

We ought to ask pardon of our readers for not recommcwfiDg
to them this unassuming volume before. Our attentioii hM !**■
drawn to it by treading a well- written review of it in the ^"*J*
Spectator. It came into the world rather as an orphan. He vbj^
would naturally have cared for it was several thousand miles <»
As for the proof-man, it either had none at all, or a very carele«o0B.

1838.] State of Religion in France. 497

Still, all gentle readers will overlook such blemishes for the sake of
the golden fruit. The author writes ex corde. He looks upon rhe-
torical rules as the Turk looks upon the infidel, with orthodox con-
tempt Blair, Campbell, Jameson and other Scotch worthies, we
suppose, he never heard of, or at least, he keeps them at a respect-
ful distance. His own cousin- Germmu, the methodological, ency-
clopaedical race meet with as little quarter at his hands. Now, if
all writers had as bright parts as Mr. Schauffler, we should have no
objection to the extermination of rhetoric. We would ourselves help
to its dethronixation^ as the coronation people say. But while men
are, as they are, Campbell must be re-printed, and we must not let
any Peter the Hermit preach up a crusade against the ' schools.^

All those who love unstudiecl nature, the outbursts of genuine re-
ligious feeling, an unfettered style, graphic delineation, fine religious
sensibilities, with no contemptible exegetical talent, will certainly pos-
sess themselves of these Meditations. Thev invest the last days of
the Redeemer whh a new interest. They lead us back to the Pie-
tists of the Halle school, to the days of Ambrose and Cyprian, or
rather to the blessed company who listened to him who spake as
never man spake.

5. — Cursory Views of the State of Religion in France^ occasioned
by a Journey in 1887. With Tfwughts on the means ofcom-
municating spiritual good generally, hi twelve letters. By
John Sh^fpardy author of ^' Thoughts on Devotion^'* etc.
London : WUliam Ball, 1698. pp. 148.

The very copious correspondence of the New York Observer, the
communications of our countryman, the Rev. Robert Baird, and the
increasing amount of intercourse between this country and France
render the re-publication of such volumes as this of Mr. Sheppard
unnecessary. The book is, however, characterized by good sense, and
serious practical views. The author seems to have travelled in the
less frequented parts of the country, and gives us considerable in-
sight into the habits and feelings of the people of the provinces.
The letters are on the subject of irreligion, superstitions, efibrts of
societies, private endeavors, ^ood tokens, various facilities, aid to so-
cieties, hints to travellers, motives and objections, additional arguments,
the French confessors, and infiuence of France. Under the last
head, there are some striking remarks on the nature of the influence
which is exerted by Frenchmen, and of the importance of its being
pervaded by the Spirit of Christ.

Vol. XII. No. 32. 63

498 Critical Notices. [Oct.

6. — First Atamal Report of the Morrison Education Sodetii^ ad
Catalogue oj books in its library. Canton : Office of tbeCU-
nese Repository, 1838. pp. 136.

The Constitution of the Morrison Education Society was adoptni
November 9, 1836. Its object is to improve and promote eduo-
tion in China by schools and other means. Chinese yoath of any
age, of either sex, and in or out of China, may be received under tie
patronage of the Society. The Report contains some highly Taloir
ble remarks on the population of the empire, different classes of peo*
pie, population of males and females, diiferent kinds of achools,Dain-
ber of scholars, age, books, methods of teaching, hours of 9udy,
school-rooms, examinations, rewards and punishments, etc. laNaa*
bae, a large district of Canton, two or three tenths of the people de-
vote their lives entirely to literary pursuits. In other districts, ooc
more than four or five tenths can read ; and only one or two in a
hundred are devoted to literary pursuits for life. The number rf
Chinese females able to read is very small, probably not more tbin
one in a hundred. Among the most opulent people in Cantoo,!
few female schools have been opened. In respect to the number of
years spent at school, there is great diversity. The better course rf
common education occupies me student five, ax, or seven yews.
The rich generally give their sons the advantage of a full course ifl
the study of the classics, with the opportunity, if they wish it, to coo*
pete for literary honors. In common schools, the number wja
from ten to forty. Various other interesting particulars respecting
the Chinese schools are added. The books belonging to the lihtaij
of the Morrison Education Society amount to 2^10 volumes; ihe
whole were presented to the Society unsolicited. Thomas B. Co-
ledge, Esq. gave 685 volumes ; J. K. Reeves, Esq. 655, and John*
Morrison, Esq. 709, The object of the Society is worthy ^^^
couragement, and it seems to be prosecuted with praisewoitfcj
energy.

1,—AssembUe Ginirah de la SodeU Evangiliqus de (k^
Sixihne Anniversaire. Geneve, 1837.

The president of this society Is M. Henri Tronchin de LaTijnv.
The Secretary is M. Ch. Gautier-Boissier. The treasurer » M. A.
G. Vieusseux. The professors of the theological school are ^-^
G. L. Galland, S. R. L. Gaussen, and H. Merle-d'Aubigne. Tw
objects of the society, and which were supported by its fumb W

Loire, etc. Towards all these objects, there were contributed

1838.] Bacon's Sermon. 409

98,748 francs. The pamphlet contains the opening speech of the
president, at the anniversary, the annual report, and the speeches of
various individuals. The association are laboring with much energy
and good fruit

8. — A Discourse on the Trt^ie in SpirUuous Liquors^ ddwered in
the Centre Meeting-House^ Isew Haven, Conn. Feb. 6, 1838.
By Leonard Bacon, pp. 54.

This sermon has special reference to the laws of the State of
Connecticut licensing the sale of ardent spirits. Mr. Bacon takes
hold of the subject with a strong hand, not having the fear of the
rum-seller before his eyes. It is one of the most fearless and thorough
discussions which the temperance reformation has brought forth.
He remarks that the license laws are all founded on the idea that
the use of ardent spirits is in a high degree dangerous to the individ-
ual and to the community. They do not attempt to interfere with
the consumption of ardent spirits in families, except in particular
cases. They make a wide distinction between selling ardent
spirits for the purpose of being used as a drink on the spot, and
selling it for the purpose of being carried awuy and used elsewhere.
They make no provision for licensing and tolerating a dram-shop.
They are designed to protect the community from the very evils
which flow from the dram-shop system. Mr. Bacon then remarks
that the business of dram-selling may be prohibited and punished, as
a crime against the public policy of the State ; it is an ofience
against public order and comfort ; against trade and industry ;
against property ; against the morals of the community ; and against
health and life. In an appendix, Mr. Bacon has industriously col-
lected a great variety of startling facts. In the city of New Haven,
there are eighty places where liquor is sold. Out of 100 adults, who
died in the city m 1837, 33 were drunkards. One of the dealers
acknowledged that his business was a bad one, but he considered
himself merely as executing the will of the Almighty, in acting as
his agent to inflict a curse on the people.

This sermon well deserves a wide currency in Massachusetts,
where the friends of rum-selling, or as they term themselves, the
friends of real temperance, are bestirring themselves wonderfully ta
procure the repeal of the license law which is a bar to their efforts
in the promotion of temperance ! Some of them are such strenuous
advocates for sobriety, that they threaten to drink rum on principle.
Being men of lofly principles and of the purest patriotism, we pre-
sume that fifteen gallons will not be too large a quantity for theic
use. The larger the quantity drunk, the purer the principle.

500 Critical Notices. [Oct.

9.^-TA^ Old Testament^ arranged in Historical and Chronohgkd
Order ^ (on the basis of LighlfooVs Chr{micle^)in »cA a«a-
fier, that the Books^ Chapters^ Psalms^ Prophesies etc. etcmsj
he read as One Connected History^ in the wards of the Axtkor'
ixed Ti'ansUUion, With Notes and Copious bideses. Bjf
the Rev. George Tomisend^ M. A.^ Prebendary ofJkrksm,
and Vicar of Northallerton. Revised^ PtmctuatA, Dkidtd
into Paragraphs and Parallelisms^ Italic Words Refxamseiy
a Choice and Copious Selection of References given^ etc Bjf
the Rev. T. W. Coit, D. D. Late President of Transykads
University.
The New Testament^ Arranged in Historical and Cknmologicd
Order ; with Copious Notes on the Principal Suhjecisin TJfca-
logy ; The Gospels on the basis of the Harmonies of U^-
foot^ Doddridge^ Pillington^ Newcome^ and Michauis ; Tk
Account of the Resurrection on tke Authorities of Wai^
Townson and Cranfield ; The Epistles are inserted » tkv
places^ and dividea according to tJie Apostles ArgmfsU.
By the Rev. George Townsend M. A.^ etc. and the whole fiettf-
edy divided into Paragraphs^ Punctuated according totkht^
Critical Texts^ tlie Italic words reexamined^ Passages asd
words of doubtful authority marked^ a choice and Copum St-
lection of Parallel Passages given^ etc. By the Bit, T. W,
Coit^ D. D. etc. Boston : Perkins and Marvin. Phila<felpbia:
Henry Perkins, 1837, and 1838. pp. 1212, 927.

We have copied the title of this valuable work at full length as
containing the best explanation of its plan and object which we are
able to give in so few words. Our readers will underslaod thai it b
THE BiBLB, in the words of our common English Translatioo. But
the events recorded in the Bible are here arranged according to (be
order of time in which they are either known or supposed lo hi^e
occurred, and the Books, Chapters, Psalms, Prophecies, etc. are m
transposed and intermingled as to correspond with the order oisao-
cession, in which they are understood to have been originally reveal-
ed and recorded. .

The peculiar excellence of this edition of the Bible consists in ift
arrangement. And here it may be proper to remark, for the relief
of such as may feel any conscientious scruples on the sulijecti tlat
the disposition of the several parts of the Bible and its division mlo
chapters and verses are not matters of divine appointment or inspiff-
tion. The sentiments and the original language of the Sacred Boon
may be resided as inspired ; but the arranging of them is wholly
the work of man, as much as the transcribing or the printing of them.
The learned author of this arrangement therefore has not perfonned
an unauthorized work. He has accomplished, with immense tewr

1838.] Towmend'i Arrangement of the Bible, 501

and research, what has been considered an important desideratum
ever since the completion of the canon of Scnpture, and what has
been attempted by numerous christian divines and scholars, of
whose labors he has availed himself in the work now presented to
the American public. That this arrangement is in all respects per-
fect, we neither believe nor affirm. In the reasons for some parts of
it we cannot concur with the author. But having examined it with
some care, we do not hesitate to pronounce it a great improvement
upon previous attempts of the kind.

Our author first arranged the Books of the Old Testament, on the
plan of Lightfoot^s Chronicle, in such a manner that they might be
read as one unbroken history. Then, to render this continuous nar-
rative attractive, and more easily remembered, he divided It into Pe^
riods^ Parts and Sections. By this means the reader who is unable
to devote much uninterrupted time to the study of the Old Testa-
ment, may, without burthenin^ his memory, take it up and lay it
down, as he would any other history or narrative.

The Periods — into which this part of Scripture History is divided
are eight. The First Period contains the history of the world and
the church from the Creation to the Deluge, and includes the first
nine chapters of Genesis. The Second Period comprises the history
of the time between the dispersion of men and the birth of Moses ;
and includes the remaining chapters of Genesis, the Book of Job and
the first chapter of Exodus. The remaining Periods need not be
described in this notice. We have named the above simply to show
the reader in what manner the Old Testament history is divided.
The Parts and Sections under the several Periods are numerous.
These too are divided according to tlie sense of the narrative and the
chronology of the events and instructions which they record, without
any regard to the enumeration of the chapters and verses in our
common English Bibles, which, however, for the convenience of
reference, are noticed in small figures in the margin.

Passing from the Old to the New Testament, our author considers
the latter as the completion of that great system of religion which
began at the fall and will continue till the consummation of all things.
The object of this arrangement^ therefore, is to place before the
readers of the New Testament the gradual development of the dis-
pensation of Christ, and the Holy Spirit, in the onler in which the
true light shone upon the christian church. He begins with a Har-
mony of the Gospels, in commendation of which we copy the fol-
lowing paragraph from his very able ^' Introduction.'^

^^ All the harmonies which have been hitherto submitted to the
world have been formed on one of two plans. The contents of the
four Gospels have been arranged in parallel columns, by which
means the whole of the sacred narrative is placed at one view before
the reader,— or they have been combined mto one unbroken story,
in which the passages considered by the hannonizer to be unneces-

502 Cntical Notices. [Oct.

Bary to the illuatration of the narrative are arbitrarily rejected. TVe
former produces great confusion in the mind of the student; the hi-
ter appears to place the reader too much at the disposal of theautiior.
The former is the Harmony strictly so called ; the latter is the mere
diatessaron or monoiessaron. To avoid the inconveniences of bodi
these systems, I have endeavored to save the reader that einbam»
ment, which is occasioned by four parallel columns, and at the aBoe
time to combine the Gospels into one order without leaving the read-
er to depend entirely on the judgment of the arranger, in the cboice
of the interwoven passages. My object has bc«n to unite thesdno-
tages of both plans. Every text of Scripture is preserved, as in tie
first, while the evangelical narrations are formed into one cooneded
history, as in the second ; every passage which is rejected from titt
continuous history being placed at the end of each 8ectiao,toeiiBUc
the reader to decide on the propriety of the order which has hem
adopted.^^

The Harmony of the Gospels thus constructed is followed hyt
chronological arrangement of the Acts of the Apostles, and tie
Epistles to the completion of the Canon of the New Testament, the
whole being divided inlojifleen Pcarts^ and subdivided into nainenwi
sections ; aAer which our author concludes his work with a biief
review of the history of the christian church from the close of die
apostolic age to the present period.

The Notes appended to the New Testament are codioub and
highly valuable. With the theological views expressed io tbeas
notes we do not in all respects concur. Yet they are learned, piooa
and instructive, and associated, as thev are, with the inspired word
of God, unchanged and unadulterated, and arranged in a maooer
happily adaptea to illustrate its meaning and make it its o«i
interpreter, the whole may be read with profit by the candid is*
quirer after the truth as it is in Jesus Christ.

On the whole, we regard Townsend's arrangement of the Bible ai
one of the most important and useful publicaticHis, which we have
been invited to examine. To the enterprising publishers we teoder
our cordial thanks for the favor thev have conferred on the Aooen-
can churches, and especially that they have furnbhed this ataodaid
work in a style so worthy the BosUm press, and at a price which vu
enable individuals and fiimilies of moderate means to poaesai
We commend it to our readers of every class, — ^to ministers, to ri»
conductors of Bible classes and to the families that call on the dsm
of the Lord. It is, ths Bible its own Intbrfrstse.

1838,] Guizot's History of Civilization. 503

10. — General History of Oivilization in Europe j from the Fall of the
Roman Empire to the French Revolution. Translated from
the French of M. Guixot^ Professor of History to La FacultS
des Lettres of Paris and Minister of Public Instruction.
First American from the second English Edition. New
York : D. Applelon & Co. 1838. pp. 346.

We have read enough of this hook to be convinced that it deserves
more than a passing notice, and more than common praise. It is
worthy to be studied ; and yet the ease and elegance of its style and
the vividness of its descriptions cannot fail to please the taste of the
cursory and superficial reader. It is at once highly entertaining and
instructive.

The subject here chosen for discussion is one of universal interest
to mankind. The history of the civilization of £urope, during the
period here contemplated, is the history of the civilization of the
world. It is our own history, in this respect, no less than that of our
transatlantic contemporaries ; and while they possess advantages for
its investigation, which are less accessible to us, our interest m the
general subject, and the instruction which we may derive from it are
no less important and practical than theirs. To American readers,
therefore, such works as those of Hallam and Guizot must be pecu-
liarly acceptable.

The vfork before us is comprised in fourteen ^' Lechtresy^ and
these, in the language of the ^^ Translator's Preface'^ (dated Oxford,
Eng. 1837,) *'*' are fourteen ^reat historical pictures. Still the work
is a unity. In the fourteen pictures, collectively, you have one great
and entire subject, — the history of civilization in Europe, — and that
so told as cannot &il to please and instruct the historian, the student,
and the philosopher.*' We commend it also to the diligent study of
christian scholars, as well as of statesmen, legislators, and politicians.

M. Guizot, in these Lectures, furnishes less of a detailed history
of the period under consideration, than we find in the works of Haf«
lam on ^ J%e State of Europe during the Middle Ages^^ and the
** Literature of Europe in the Fifieenth^ Sixteenth and Seventeenth
CenturiesJ*^ lie is also less systematic in his references to original
authorities. Yet his work is not deficient in such historical details
as are suited to the object he had in view, and he everywhere in*

Sires the reader with confidence that he is master of his subject,
e insists, indeed, on the propriety of confining history to facts.
But are there no facts but such as are material and visible ? ^ There
are moral, hidden facts, of a general nature and without a name, of
which it is impossible to say that they happened in such a year, or
on such a day, but which are just as much facts as battles, wars, and
public acts of governments. Such a fact is civilization, which, like
any other, may be studied, described, and have its history recounted.**

504 Critical Notices. [Oct.

France is the great central point from which he ooDtemplatesdK
fact of European civilization. From this point he looks abroad od
the States of Europe, and gathers up the elementary principles of
which the present social system has been ccHistructed. He sbovs
us what it aerived from the Roman Empire, what was brought iob
it by the barbarians, by the feudal aristocracy, by the Cborch, tnr
free cities and communities, and by royalty ; what was the infloeoce
of the Crusades, the Reformation, the English RevolutioD, etc. ete.
In all this, his manner is original, grand, and philosophical.

On some of the topics here discussed, we are accustomed to en-
tertain di^rent views from those expressed by our author ; and with
our republican and protestant prepossessions, we most still beg leave
to differ from him on these points. Yet we admire the caooor, a
well as the philosophical accuracy, with which he has, in geneial, pI^
sented the combined elements and causes of the existing stale </
civilization in Europe.

We will only add, in the words of the English translator, Ihatttis
work of M. Guizot *^ must be considered as a boon to manlciod.'*
We welcome the American edition of it, as a voice from the histofy
of the past, well suited to instruct both our civil and ecclesiastical
leaders in regard to the means best adapted to promote the vei&ie
and happiness of our own country, the development of society, tiR
expansion of human intelligence, and the triumph of virtue.

11. — Letters on Tkeran and Aspasio. Addressed to the Astkor
by Robert Sandeman, From the fourth Edinburgh eddJoa.
New York: John S. Taylor. — Boston: Weeba, Jordan* Co.
1838. pp. 500.

Robert Sandeman was a native of Scotland, bom in 1723^ He
pursued his studies at Edinbui^h preparatory to the clerical pio>
fession, but having adopted the sentiments of John Glass, the leadef
of the Glassites in Scotiand, he abandoned the mintstiy. Tboo^
dependent on a secular employment for support, he early dUtt*
ffuished himself as an author, and his followers in England and ia
ttiis country constituted the sect which are denominated, after hii
name, Sandemanians,

The Dialogues of Theron and Aspasio were the work of the dis-
tlnffuished James Hervey of England, author of *'*' Mediiatiom^^
and have been regarded as among the very best effi>rt8 of bis genhft
His views of the nature of fcdth, and some other points, called forth
the Letters of Sandeman, whose tide is given above. They vc^
first published in 1757. They attack Hervey's notion of airppn-
ating faith with uncommon acuteness and no little effect Sande-
man strenuously insists that justifying faith is nothing more nor le«
than the ^^ bare belief of the lMu*e miui," witnessed or testified ooo-
ceming the person and work of Christ. His style is caustic and ae*

1838.] Letters on Theron and Aspasio, 505

vere. He treats what he calls ^* the popular preachers,'^ as corrupt*
ers of the gospel, and consequently as misleading their hearers in
the all-important concerns of another world. As such he does not
spare them.

The practices of the Sandemanians which may find countenance
in this book are their weekly administration of the Lord^s supper,
their love-feasts, which consist in their dining at each other^s houses
in the interval between services on the Sabbath, the kiss of charity,
etc. etc.

The notion of faith for which the members of this sect contend
may be gathered from the following words of Sandeman, who speak-
ing of his Letters, says : *^ The motto of the title page of this work
is, ' One thing is needful ;' which he calls the sole requisite to
justification or acceptance with Grod. By the sole requisite he
understands the work finished by Christ in his death, proved by his
resurrection to be all-sufiicient to justify the guilty ; — that the whole
benefit of the event is conveyed to men only by the apostolic report
concerning it ; that every one who understands this report to be
true, or is persuaded that the event actually took place, as testified
by the apostles, is justified and finds relief to his guilty conscience ;
that he is relieved not by finding any favorable symptom about his
own heart, but by finding their report to be true ; that the event
itself, which is reported, becomes his relief, so soon as it stands true
in his mind, and accordingly becomes his faith ; that all the divine
power which operates on the minds of men, either to give the first
relief to their consciences, or to influence them in every part of
their obedience, is persuasive power, or the forcible conviction of
truth."

They have a plurality of elders, pastors or bishops in each church,
who are chosen from amon^ the laity.

In discipline they are stnct and severe, separating from the com-
munion and worship of all such religious societies as do not profess
the simple truth as their only ground of hope, and walk in obedience
thereto. They are not governed by majorities in their discipline,
but esteem unanimity as absolutely necessary. If a member oifiers
from the rest, he must give up the point or be excluded ; and with the
excommunicated they hold it unlawful to eat or to drink.

Mr. Sandeman, being invited by some persons in America who
had become interested in his writing, came to this country in 1764,
and after collecting a few small societies, closed his life in Danbury,
Conn. 1771.

The present condition of this sect in Danbury, strikingly exhibits
the legitimate results of at least two of the principles mamtained by
Sandeman. The first is the belief that ^^ the cause of the disallowed
Messiah will never prevail in this mortal state, but will remain as a
bruised reed and smoking fiax," though its enemies will never be

Vol. XIL No. 32. 64

$06 Critical Notices, [Oct.

able utterly to break or extinguish it. This belief is suited to a-
tinguish all zeal for the propagation of the gospel, and reoden the
sect indiiferent to its own increase. The second is the principle,
named above, requiring absolute agreement or unanimity amoog the
members, both in doctrine and practice. This leaves the sect widi
but little to do but to a^ee. To maintain the truth against oppoeen
and to secure the unanimity of their own body by excommumcadDg
all who disagree, is the sum of their direct responsibilities. Tbus
the Society in Danbury, which, at the death of Sandennn, wa»
numerous, has maintained its unanimity at the expense of its oooh
hers, for more than sixty years, until it has become reduced to only
SIX or eight members, who will probably continue to agree una
what they believe to be wisdom shall die with them.

On the whole, we do not believe that much good will be aooom-
plished by the re-publication of Sandeman*s fetters. The snoaj-
mous editor of this edition acknowledges that "^ the name of its aa>
thor has long been under reproach, and will probably so continue to
be, while the memory of these letters shall endure.^' flis sole ob-
ject in bringing this work a^in before the public, he sa}«, '^ lies is
the deliberate conviction which the editor, entertains, of its being a
far more faithful exhibition of gospel truth than any other woik
which has ever come to his knowledge.'^ In this convictiop v«
have no doubt of his sincerity. But we differ from him in opioioD,
as he seems to anticipate, in the above quoted sentences, that ido^
Christians will. We do not mean to condemn SandemaniaiiisiD in
the gross. There are many things in the system which are worthy
of serious attention. It contains much important truth, yet so
blended with error as greatly to endanger its salutary efflcacj.
Andrew Fuller remarks, in his masterly "^ Strictures an Sandaun-
ianism^'* that ^' Sandeman has expunged from Christianity a f^
deal of false reli^n ; but whether he has exhibited that of Cbi^
and his apostles is another question.^^

12.-2^ Biblical Analysis ; or a Topical Arrangement q/* ^ ^
structions of the Holy Scriptures. Adapted to ihe vserf
Ministers, Sabbah School and Bible Class Teachen, Fsmbf
Worship and prieate meditation. Compiled hy /. U. F^
sons. Boston : Whipple and Damrell, 1837. pp. 311.

Though this work has been more than a year before the puhBc,
we have not until recently given it a careful examination. Prepared,
as we now are, to appreciate its merits, we could not be easily per-
suaded to part with it. Its design is similar to that of " GasU»$
Collections,^^ or " Concordance,''^ so extensively used by clergyinffl
in this country for the last thirty years. Its plan, however, is a de-
cided improvement upon that of Gaston, and appears to us to have
been executed with more discrimination and better judgment.

1838.] Fasdick'i 0$rman Gratnmar. SOT

The work consists of an arranj^ement of the numerous topics of
Scripture insuruction and a collection of pertinent texts under each.
It has been prepared, as the compiler informs us, without much aid
firom the concordance, or any similar work, but from a consecutive
reading of the Bible. It does not profess to be a digest of religious
truth aiid duty, but an attempt to present divine truth in its due pro-
portions, by giving to the passages arranged under each leading
topic about the comparative space which they occupy in the Scrip-
tures. The student of the Bible, with the help of this Analysis and
arrangement, will be surprised at the comparative fulness exhibited
in the symmetry in which the several topics come from the mind of
the Spirit

We are happy to learn that another edition of this work is contem-
plated. It is well adapted to the several classes of readers named
m itB title page, and needs only to be known to be appreciated.

18. — Fragments from the Study' of a Pastor. By Gardiner Springy
Pastor of the Brick Presbyterian Churchy New York, Vol. J.
New York : John S. Taylor, 1838. pp. 160.

This little volume is in Dr. Springes best style, and is adapted at
once to please and mstruct The ^a^mento embraced in it are pre-
sented in seven Numbers, with the following titles ; — ^The Church in
the wilderness^ — ^Reflections on the new year, — ^The Inquiring Meet-
ings— ^Letter to a Young Cleigyman, — The Panorama, — Moral
Graduation, — ^The Useful Christian.

The announcement of this as Vol. I, indicates that the author in*
tends it as the beginning of a series. Those who read the fizst wiU
be solicitous to see his subsequent volumes.

14. — LUroductian to the German Language^ comprising a Gemum
Grammar y vnth an Appendix qjf important Tables and other
Matter; and a German Redder^ consisting of Sdeetiona
from the Classical Literature of (rermany^ accompanied by
Explanatory Notes and a Vocamdary adapted to the Selections,
By Damd Fosdick^ Jr, Andover and New York : Gould dc
Newman, 1838. pp. 270. 12mo.

We have had considerable experience in the use of Grerman gram-
mars, and we have never found any one exactly to our mind. The
reason we suppose to be that they were all made by native Germans.
The authors did not imderstand the wants of English students. Fa-
miliar with the tongue from their infant days, they imagined that for-
eign students would experience as little difficulty. They expended
their principal labor on points important only to the advanced student
Noehden's grammar is the best which wo have seen. The author
was a sensible man, considerably famiUar with teaching the language

508 Ldterary and JMiscell, hiieUigence. [Oct.

to Englishmen, and himself pretty well acquainted with the English
idioms ; yet this grammar is not, in all respecta, a proper one for
beginners. It discusses too much the less important points— nuchas
would be interesting to an experienced reader, or even to such meo
as Adeiung and Grimm. The arrangement, too, is not the moal
perfect. The prominent points, which are to be commitled to mem-
ory, are not kept sufficiently distinct from matters of inferior intereBt.
The novice is bewildered. Besides, there are some things vuitn^
which ought to be found in the Appendix — thuigB perfe<Sy familiir
to a native, but which a poor English scholar must search volame
aAer volume before he can find. We refer to abbreviatioiis, elc
We have not yet made ourselves particularly acquainted widi Mr.
Fosdick^s grammar named at the head of this article. From an ex-
amination, however, of some part of it in manuscript, we have do
doubt but that it will meet the wants of the youthful student in te-
man. Mr. Fosdick has been, for many years, engaged in the stn^
of this language in circumstances well adapted to qualify him for hv
task. If he has not made a better school grammar than either of
his predecessors, he will certainly be much in fault, as he bad the
advantage of all the previous light and darkness on the subject
Those who have read his translations of Hug^s Intioduction to the
New Testament, and of De Sacy's Principles of General Grammfir,
will have a right to expect in the present undertaking a dear, well*
arranged, and accurate manual. We presume they will not be dis-
appointed. One hundred and eight pages are occupied with the
grammar. In an Appendix of about liAy pages, there are lists of
irregular verbs, compound verbs, different classes of nouns, prefwo-
tions, German versincation, abbreviations, etc. Then succeed ^e]e^
tions from the writings of Lessing, Krumacher, Gessoer, Herder,
Engel, Richter, Goethe, Novalis, Schiller, Gleim, Willamov, Nico-
lai, Klonstock, Komer, Biirger, Haller, A. W. Schlegel, etc The
remainaer of the volume is occupied with a vocabulary. We may
notice the work more at length hereafter.

ARTICLE X.

LlTERABT AND MISCELLANEOUS [nTELLIOENCE.

Bnrteti JStates.

The Van £8s Library. — We announced in the July No. of the RepJ**
tory tkat the New York Theolog^ical Semiaarj Kad jmrchaaed the nIaaUe
Libmy of the Rev. Dr. iioander Van £w of Bavaria in Geraaiiy. ^^
f ince learn by a letter from the agent for the pwrohiK, Mr. Wolf of -^^

1838.] Literartf and MUceU. bUtlligmct. 609

gen to the Rey. Dr. McAtiley of New York, that the Library contains
14,000 volumes, among which are many rare and precious books. We copy
the following from Mr. Wolfs letter in his own words. — *< There is a very
rare collection of all the Pamphlets of the Reformation. It comes from the
Monastery of St. Mary in Westphalia. It was in this Monastery that Dr.
Van £ss was in his youth, when the King of Prussia suppressed all the
monasteries. Before the edict of suppression was promulgated, the monks,
who foresaw the lot of their monasteries, sought each to secure something
for himself, considering this suppression as a robbery. Dr. Van £ss, for his
share, took many works of the Library. There was, besides, a little retired
closet, under double bolts, upon which was the inscription *' lAbri ProhUnti.**
Dr. Van Ess was the only one who had a key to tiiis formidable place, and
thence he procured that valuable collection of Pamphlets and writings of
the Reformation which the monastery had taken care to complete even in
the time of the Reformation."

Public notice has already been given of the establishment of a fourth year
of study in the Andover Theological Seminary. It has been thought to be
desirable by the trustees and friends of the institution, on several accounts,
that an eiperiment of this kind should be made. The library of the institu-
tion is of great value, particularly in the departments of German and of the
oriental tongues. The existence in Andover of a press with types in eleven
Iftngoages, the present number of instructors in the institution, and its vi-
cinity to Boston (about one hour's distance,) and to the large libraries in the
neighborhood, furnish, it is thought, ample grounds and ftcilities for a new and
more enlarged course of study. A class will be organized on the 24th of the
present month (October), It will embrace all such, as may offer themselves,
who have completed a regular tliree years' course of study at any theological
seminary, or who have made acquisitions substantially equivalent to a regular
theological education. A systematic plan of studies will be pursued, com-
prising the higher branches in biblical literature, christian theology and
ethics, history of the christian doctrines, and sacred rhetoric. Particular at-
tention will be given to the investigation of the original languages of the
Scriptures and to kindred subjects. Instruction will be given both by reci-
tations and by lectures. Opportunities will probably be offered for forming
private classes for the study of the German, Arabic, etc. as the necessities of
the students may require. Valuable opportunities for study will be afforded
to such individuals as are expecting 4o engage in foreign missions or in the
translation of the Scriptures.

There have been some important alterations proposed in the course of
studies at Harvard University. One of these is the substitution of certain
studies in the ancient and modern languages for the higher branches of
mathematics. At the close of the Freshman year, all the students will have
the option of proceeding further with the mathematics, or of taking some
one of several specified courses in other branches. The plan may be found
la be a good one, but we have our doubts about it.

510 Literary andMuceU. Intelligence. [Oct.

fllrabfa mH VaUstfne.

Remarks of Prof, Robinmm,

Our readers are aware that Prof. Robinson of the New York llmlQgieil
Seminary is pursuing his researches in the East preparatorj to the pofafia*
tion of a Geography of the Holy L^nd. High expectations are entertusri
of the yaloe of these researches to the cause of Biblical Science. Tbe
following interesting particulars are furnished by a letter from Dr. Kekmrn
to the Rev. Dr. McAuley, dated Jerusalem, April 30, 1838.

" At length,'' says Dr. R. « my feet sUnd within thy gates, O Jerankn!
A gracious God has brought us as on eagles* wings through the givtt isj
terrible wilderness ; and here, in this city, where of old JehoTah dwelt, ad
where our Redeemer taught and suffered, we are permitted to hold tvect
conyerse with all our brethren of the Syrian mission, and to oelebnte vilk
them the Saviour's dying love in the place where be instituted the ordiantt
in commemoration of his death."

Journey aeroit tke Ihsert,

*' I wrote you on the 2d of March from Cairo, which cHy I regard as tk
starting point of my real journey. Mr. Cheever left ns there, prefernif ti
go by way of Alexandria and Beirout ; but he was taken ill, and wu noiUe
to accomplish his object.

" Our party, consisting of Rev. Mr. Smith, Mr. Adger and myself, left Cut
March 12th and reached Mt. Sinai on the 23d. There we remained fiic
days ; and then set off for Akaha on the 29th, where we arrived April 4th.
It had been our intention to go hence to Wady Mousa, with Arabi of tk
Alouin tribe ; but finding they were encamped at a great distance, and tkit
we must be detained six or seven days, we preferred to keep oar Tovan
Arabs and take the road across the great western desert to Gaa or Hebnii
as the case might be, the way being for several days the same. Thii iit
route as yet untrodden by modem travellers. We left Akaba on the 5th of
April, and reached Hebron and Jerusalem on Saturday the I4th, vheie we
were welcomed to a home in the houses of our missionary brethren, Whili^
and Lanneau.**

American Clergymen assenUded at Jeruealem.
" Here we had the pleasure of finding all the members of the Sjiiu
mission, (excepting Mr. Pease of Cyprus,) assembled to hold their (eoenl
meeting. All the family from Beirout was presenL We form altogether a
hand of ten American ministers of the Gospel; Mr. Nicolaysoa if the
eleventh ', and within two or three days Mr. Paxton of Beirout hu arrived
with his family. Probably so large a number of Protestant clergymen nefcr
met in the Holy City,— •certainly not from the new world."

Passage of the Israelites through the Red Sea.
" The results of our journey thus far have been much more importanlaBd
satisfactory than I could have anticip^ited. At the Red Sea both Mr. Saith

1838.] Literary and MUcell. btettigence. 511

and myielf were able to eatUfy oaraelyei that tJie passage of the Israelitee
must have taken place at or near Soexi it being, of coarse, impossible, after
the lapse of so many ages, to point out the exact spot. We suppose it may
have taken place a mile or two below Suez, where even now the shoals
from the opposite sides come near together, and where at very low tides the
Arabs can wade through, though the water is up to their necks. On the
east side of the Sea, we could trace the route of the Israelites through the
desert of Shin to Eliud and beyond, where they encamped < by the Red
Sea.' (Num. 33: 11.} This we have no doubt was at the mouth of the
Wady Taybe."

aUe of Mmmt SUud.
** To Sinai itself we came with some incredulity, wishing to investigate
the point whether there was any probable ground, beyond monkish tradition,
for fixing upon the present supposed site. Wc were both surprised and
gratified to find here, in the inmost recesses of these dark and lolly granite
mountains, a fine plain spread out before the foot of the so-called Horeb,— a
plain capable of containing two or three millions of people ; — from the
south end of which the mountain rises perpendicularly and overlooks the
whole,— so that whatever passed upon its top would be visible to all. J%is
part of the mountain is about 1200 feet above the plain ', — the summit now
called Sinai is about two miles farther South, and is not visible from below.
With that summit Moses probably had no concern. South West of this is
Mount St. (Catharine, 2700 feet above the plain, and neariy 1000 feet higher
than Gebel Mousa, or Sinai. We made minute and particular inquiries of
Arabs and others acquainted with the whole peniniula, and could not learn
that there was so much room in any other spot among the mountains, cer*
tainly not in the vicinity of any of the loftier peaks."

Description of the Desert.
<* Our journey through the great desert, this side of Akaba, was deeply
interesting. Of the nature of the whole region which we traversed yoa
may judge from the fact, that from the borders of the Nile till we arrived on
the borders of Palestine, we saw not one drop of running water, nor a single
blade of grass, except a few small tufts in two instances. The Wadys or
water-courses of the desert and mountains are sprinkled with skirts and
tufts of herbs, on which the camel and flocks of sheep and goats brouse ;
but no horses nor neat cattle are found throughout tlie whole region. It is
true, the present is a year of dearth, scarcely any rain having now ftdlen for
two seasons. When there is rain in plenty, then, comparatively, the desert
may be said to bud and blossom, and grass springs up over a great portion
of its surftice. In such a season the Arabs say they are * Kings.* "

Andent

" On this rente we found the ruins of the ancient Roman places, Eboda
and Elusa; and also those of Beersheba, 28 miles 8. W. of Hebron,

513 Literary and MuceU. bUdMgenee, [Oct.

itill eaU«d Bineba. There are two wells of fine water, over 40 ftette^
one 13 1-2 feet diameter and the other about 6, walled vp with ■olidBii»
work, the bottoms dog oat of the eolid rock. Cloee by are mias iiof t
largre straggling Tillage, corresponding entirely to the deseriptionof itby
£a9ebiu8 and Jerome."

JfntiqiaHes of Jerusalem.

" In Jerasalem we are sorprised to find how mnch of antiqoity reniin,
which no traveller has ever mentioned, or apparently ewer seen. Tlie villi
aronnd the great area of the mosque of Omar are without all qoestion, tho»
built by Herod around the area of his temple ; the size, position snd tkmt'
ter of the stones, (one of them 30 1-2 feet long, and many over 20 ftetj
show this of themselves ; but it is further demonstrated by the htt, tktf
near the S. W. corner there still remains, in a part of the wall, the ibotof
an immense arch evidently belonging to the bridge which sncie&llj M
from the temple to the Xystus on Mt. Sion ; (Joaephua J. 6. 6. 2.) Tlnm
one appears ever to have seen. In the castle near the Ya&a gate b absiB
ancient tower of stones like those of the temple, conesponding pntkeij to
Josephus's description of the tower Hippicus, (B. J. 5. 4. 3.) which TitoilA
standing as a memento ; — ^the ancient part is over 40 feet high, and Mr
solid without any room within. We have no doubt that it is Hippieai.

We have thus gained some important fixed points, from which to ftaitii
applying the ancient descriptions of the city. We have been able slv to
trace to a considerable distance the ancient wall N. W. and N. of thepiciat
city. The pool of Siloam at the mouth of the Tyropecum, (see *Otfka>>
wood's plan,) is without, doubt the Siloam of Joaephns, and the wsU «f
Mebemiah, furUier down is the En-Rogel of Scripture, where the border of
Judah and Benjamin passed up the valley of Hinnon. We have ibostf
further that there is a living fountain of water deep under the mmtptfi
Omar, which is doubtless ancient ; the water hsa just the taste of tint o'
Siloam, and we conjecture a connection between them. This point ve
have yet to examine. We have not completed the half of what we wiri) to
investigate in this city, and could spend another month or two, with pnAi
in the like researches here."

Further Researches Proposed,
" Our plan is to make excursions from this city to the neighboiinf ntof
of ancient places, — ^to Jericho and the Jordan, and also a longer ow to
Gaza, thence to Hebron, and thence to Wady Mousa, so as to ezpkne tk
north end of the Ghor and the region of the Dead Sea. I hope to Bndtoae
trace of Kadesh and other cities in that region. From all the infonnitiii*
we can get, it would seem that in the rainy seasons, when water raos is U0
Ghor, it flows northward towards the Dead Sea, thus contradictiiig tbe

hypothesis that the Jordan once flowed through it to the^ ^^•

Afterwards we hope to go north, examine the sources of the Jordaa a«"
other points as far as Damascus, and then pasa from Beiront to SajT"*.
All this, if the Lord will, and as he will."

1838.]

Literary and MiscelL Jhtelligence,

513

CKrest 3Br(ta(n.

Umverriiy of Oxford. Summary of membera, January 1838. The firat
column denoteg the total number on the books of each college, and the
second) the number of those who are members of the conyocation : —

Christ Church

903

481

Pembroke

181

105

Brasennose

394

227

Magdalen

169

126

Oriel

318

163

New

150

70

£zeter

313

127

Jesus

146

53

fialltol

303

127

Lincoln

131

66

Trinity

S80

116

Merton

130

66

Queen's

265

180

Corpus

119

86

Wadham

245

87

M\ Souls

104

78

Worcester

231)

104

St.£dmond Hall 100

53

University

234

119

St. Mary Hall

56

23

St. John's

226

117

New inn Hall

49

5

Magdalen Hall

182

57

St Alban Hall

25

10

Total members on the Boards
of Conyocation

it

tt

52G4
2646

Unhersity of CamJbridge. Summary of members in January 1838. The
first column denotes the total number on the boards of each college, and the
second the number of those who are members of the Senate :

Trinity

1098

864

Magdalen

188

84

St. John's

1087

564

Jesus

179

78

Queen's

353

130

Clare Hall

169

80

Caius

280

124

Trinity Hall

139

45

Corpus

227

90

Pembroke

124

55

Christ's

222

99

King's

100

79

Emmanuel

220

114

Sidney

101

55

St. Peter's

205

98

Downing

50

28

Catherine Hall

203

75

Commorantes in

VUk 0

11

Total members on 1

the books

• • •

5555

Total members of the Senate

• • •

2663

E»ng*s CoUege, London, From the Report, deliyered at the Annual meet-
ing held on the 28th of April, it appears that the Students amounted, in
the year ending at Christmas, to 665 ; and consisted of 1 16 regular students
and 60 medical in the senior department, and 346 pupils in the junior, with
146 students who attended particular courses of lectures. Queen Victoria
has become patroness of the College.

University CoUege^ London, On the 28th of April, a distribution of prizes
to the medical students took place. There had been an increase of 57 pupils
in the iiujulty of medicine and the arts.

Vol. XU. No. 33. 65i

514 lAterary and MiscelL tntelligenee. [Oct.

The receipts of the British and Foreign Bible Society, darinf the hit
year, were £97^7 Ml. Ezpenditares £91,179. 14. 11.

Rev. 6. S. Faber has lately published an inquiry into the Hisloiy aad
Theology of the ancient Vallenses and .^Ibigenses. — Rev. J. S. Stapkloa
has translated from the German, Dr fieander's Life of Chrysostom.

i^rance.

De Sacy published, a few days before his death, a work entitled *' Expoi^
des Doctrines des Druses/' This contains the results of the author's loo^-
continued inquiries respecting the religion of this famous sect. The inak-
rials were found in 123 Arabic manuscripts.

iSermani;.
Professor Freytag is publishing a complete collection of Arabic pToreAi
with a Latin translation and notes. His Arabic lexicon in four volomef, if
well as his smaller Arabic lexicon in one volume, are published. — Ch.H.
Weise of Leipsic has published <* Die evangel ische Greschichte kritisch and
philosophisch dargestellet/* — O. T. A. Fritzsche has brought oat at Hilk
a work on the Epistle to the Romans. — Ewald of Gottingen has accepted a
professorship of oriental languages at Tabingen. — A new scientific and eriti-
oal periodical has been started at Halle, under the title of* Halliacfae Jabita-
cher fllr Wissenschail und Kunst." A number will appear every day except
Sunday. Among the contributors are Creuzer, Dahlmann, Danz, Diets,
Droysen, Ewald, Gans, J. and W. Grimm, Gruppe, Hermann, Hitzig, Kel-
ler, Lassen, Matthaei, Ranke, C. Raumer, Dr. Strauss, (of Berlin), rUmd,
De Wette, and numerous others. The subscription per annum will be £3.
— Berlin contains at present eighty-five booksellers, twenty-nine secood-hiid
booksellers, about fifty circulating libraries, and four paper minnftctoriei.

Stalji.
AngeloJMai has been made a cardinal by the pope.

Cfreece.
A new and thoroughly revised version of the Arabic Bible is soon lo ke
commenced under the care of the Rev. Mr. Schlienz of Malta. The wutoi
such a version has long been felt by the oriental churches, which, notwits*
standing their depressed state, have made some efforts to sopplj wi
want. Mr. Levees and Mr. Bambas are now occupied in the revisioa of the
New Testament in modern Greek. — ^A fount of Armenian ^pebai hees
forvirarded to the American missionaries at Smyrna, and a revised editioo of
the Armenian N. T. was shortly to be entered on at the ezpenie of the
British and Foreign Bible Society. The printing of the Wallachian N.T.
is soon to be commenced. Mr. Levees has just completed the fint trault-
tion of the Old Testament into modem Greek which has been giren tfi the
public.

1838.] Literary and MiscelL InttUigence. 515

An eastern female education society lately formed in England has sent oat
two young ladies as school teachers to Egypt, Miss Holliday and Miss
Rogers. On the 7th of March last Miss Holliday was officially waited on by
one of the officers of State, Hekekyan EfTendi, who bad come directly from
Mohammed Ali, and formally asked her if she would take in charge the ed-
ucation of the royal females, consisting of a hundred in number, principally
Mohammed's daughters, nieces and nearest relatives. Hekekyan said,
'* This is only the beginning of female education in Egypt, for the pasha has
much larger views ; but he wishes first to try the experiment on his old
family. Much depends on the approbation of his eldest daughter, whether
instruction shall spread through the country ; only gain her favor and re-
gard, and you will carry every point to your utmost wishes/' Miss H. ex-
pected to enter on this work as soon as she had completed the necessary pre-
parations. The pasha has a college of translators, composed of 150 young
Arabs, many of whom understand the French language. There are also a
few English translators, young Turks and Arabs, who were brought up in
London by the orders of the pasha.

Central 0[s(a.

We perceive by the papers, thata British steam-boat has just ascended the
Euphrates to that point on the river whence the direct overland journey to
Aleppo commences. No obstruction was experienced from the Arab tribes.
The boat proceeded against the current at about the rate of four or five miles
an hour. This passage is considered as having settled the practicability of
steam-boat navigation on the river. — It does not appear that Russia is mak-
ing much progress in her eflbrts to subdue the tribes on the Caucasus.
Her disciplined armies find little opportunity to show their powers among
those wild mountaineers. What the ulterior objects of this ambitious mon-
archy are, it is not difficult to divine. Her wide-grasping arras eitend
from China to the ^gcan. She keeps a good lookout on Constantinople,
on Persia and on the regions of Transoxiana. How far Russia entertains
any real intention of checking the British power in India, we cannot t«l].
That Britain has strong jealousies in this matter no one can deny. In the
advance of British power, every philanthropist, we think, must rejoice. It
is the progress of civilization, learning and pure religion. The Russian in-
fluence on these half barbarous nations is clearly a mixed one. Some im-
provements are introduced. Better roads and bridges are formed. Some-
thing like a police is established. Life and liberty are not exposed to so
many hazards. On the other band, there seems to be but little freedom of
opinion. The great mass of the Russians themselves are but imperfectly
civilized. How can they greatly contribute to the improvement of the Ar-
menians, Georgians, Turks and Persians, especially when we take into ac-

516 Literary and MUcelL httUigence. [Oct.

count the religion of the Russians. We shall watch the progreai of
great contest of England and Russia, where Asia is the Ibot-bsll, with tke
intensest interest. What may be the designs of ProTidence, we eaml,
of course, fathom. We cannot but hope, however, that it will tend grfstly to
the spread of pure Christianitj, and to the introduction of a new element of
life into the torpid and worn-out dynasties of middle Asia.

We are glad to see that Mr. Medhurst's history of China is now pabBih-
ed. We had hoped to review it in the present number of the RepoaViiy,
but we did not receiye it in season. From the character and opportanitief of
the author we have strong hopes that the book will add much to our koovl-
edge of this immense empire. It takes up the subject of tbe chroook^flf
China, extent, probable population, civilization, government and Iain,ltt-
guage and literature, religions. Catholic missions, Protestant missioiii to
Canton, Malacca, Batavia, voyages up the coast of China, subseqnentoeesr-
rence, class of laborers required for China, desiderata for the ChioMe bm-
•ion. — Mr. Medhurst's history, the Chinese Repository and Davis'i Htftofj
of China, (noticed in the Repository, Vol. X. p. %M,) will furnish excellent
materials for obtaining a very correct view of the celestial empire. — 11»
Missionary Herald for September contains a specimen of the Chinese sKtil
types prepared by Mr. Dyer, missionary of the I^ndon Missionaiy Society
at Malacca. The punches and matrices are the property of that Societ j, uA
founts of type will be furnished for benevolent purposes at tbe cost piice.
The whole number of characters in the original fount is 3,232; to which it ii
in contemplation to add another list of 1 ,648 characters. The cost of a fomt
is about $500. Tbe presses in connection with the missions of the Americia
Board, in communities where the Chinese language is used, will be fomiahcd
with founts.

INDEX TO VOL. XII.

A.

Active obedience of Christ, views of
the early reformers on, 420.

Analogies between Nature, Providence
and Gra^e. The order of proceed-
ing in each is gradual 22. Jm-
Srovement or advancement in each
3. Types and prophecies 26.
The earlier stages in each prepara^
tory to the later 29. Economical
wisdom in each 31. Similar dis-
tinctions of time, space, rank, etc.
32. The same end sought in each
35. Remarks. Analogy affords the
best means of answering objec-
tions against science and religion
40. Importanttostudy nature and
providence 41. Our duty to fall in
with the analogies of nature, provi-
dence and grace 44.

Anderson, Rev. Rufus,D.D. an Mis-
sionary Schools 87.

Jtndaver Theol. Sem. fourth year of
study in 509.

Angels, the scriptural idea of. The
existence of a world of spirits, a
subject of experience and observa-
tion 356. Proved by analogy 357.
Taught by the religions philosophy
of every age 359. The Scriptures
frequently notice spiritual intelli-
gences,— their names and titles
360. Explained 361. Notpersoni-
fications, but real existences 370.
The term spirit, 7r>'«v,ua, etc. ex-
plained 371. In the' Scriptures,
angels appear with bodies 372.
No distinction of sex, of prodigious
stature, etc. 374. Constitute a ce-
lestial hierarchy 375. The sera-
phim 376. The archangel 377.
The number of aneels very great

378. Sheol and hades explained

379. Anffels never die 380. Not
mentionea in the Mosaic account of
the creation 381. The ultimate
design of God, the happiness of his

Vol. XII. No. 32.

creatures 383. The notion of the
Christian Fathers respecting guar-
dian angels 385. The world of
spirits not at a great distance, — we
are in the midst of it 387.

Arabian Desert 510, 511.

Arabic Bible 515.

Armenia, works lately published in
256.

Authority, a source of moral obliga-
tion. The prevailing spirit of in-
subordination 276. A sense of
obligation awakened from two
sources, the nature of things and
authority. The latter only con-
sidered. I. Why is authority ne-
cessary as a source of obligation ?
277. Different theories 278. An-
ihority necessary because, 1 . There
are many purposes essential to the
government of society, which can-
not be gained by leaving mankind
to the separate decisions of each
one's intuitive or reflective percep-
tions 280.— 2. Additional sanctions
to moral obligation necessary 283.
II. What is the test of legitimate
authority ? The propriety of the
relation oetween the sovereign and
the subject to be consulted 286.
There must be competent qualifi-
cations 287. Legislation must not
contravene the claims of natural
obligation 289. It must not con-
flict with any higher authority 290.
Authority may give obligation to
that which would otherwise have
been a matter of indifference 291.
Refusal to obe^, unless the unrea-
sonableness of the precept be ex-
hibited, makes a man either a rebel
or an outlaw 293. The spirit of
law fills the whole field of its jn-
risdiction 293. Disobedience to ue
lowest rightful authority, as truly
sin as disobedience to the highest
294.

66

518

Index,

B.

Bacon f LeonardfOninSic in spiritaous

liquors 49ii.
BallarUinej Rev. £. TranBlation of

Hengstenberg on the causes of the

denial of the Mosaic origin of the

Pentateuch 458.
BaVf a member of the New York, ou

Presbyterianism iild.
Baron Ve Sacy^ notice of S54.
Biblical AnalusU 506.
Biak^ Prof. G. Commentary on Gren-

esis, notice of 241.

C.

Cambridge University ^ England 513.

Central 3lsia bid.

China, 408, 516.

China f notice of 256.

Chronological Arrangement of the Bi-
ble 500.

Churchf the Presbyterian, state of
219.

Ciceronis, M. T. ad Quintnra fratrem
dialog! tres de oratore, notice of
252.*

CivUixation in £urope, general history
of 503.

Cofper Mines in Cornwall 495.

Cnttcal J^otices 238, 492.

OufioorM, Ralph, D. D. True intel-
lectual system of the universe 242.

D.
Dsnial of the Mosaic Origin of the

Pentateuehf causes of the 458.
DiUaway, C. K. Cicero de oratore,

notice of 252.

E.

S^ffiy RrformerSf views of, on faith
179. And on the active obedience
of Christ 420.

EeelesiasteSf the philosophy of 197.
To what description of work does
the book belong ? 198. Its style
compared with that of Job 199.
With the proverbs of Solomon and
the maxims of profane authors 202.
The object of tne book and its con-
tents 205. The results of its in-
quiries 211.

Ecclesiastical and Voluntary associa-
tions for the promotion of benevo-
lent objects 257.

Editor on the state of the Presbyterian
church 819.

Edueatum^ home, notice of 251.
Education in China 498.
Edwards^ Prof. B. B. on the itodjsf
the Hebrew language 113.

F.

Faith J views of the early refonnenea
179. Dr. Junkin*s charge ifuail
Mr. Barnes 17j». Views of Lntber
181. The Augsburg Confhm
1 85. Acts of the CoUoqniom Mir-
purgense 186. The ConfefsioDof
Bohemia, C]oppenburg,Tilenai4&
Gomar 187. AU assert that fthh
is not confidence. Dr. Pireoi 191
Wendeline makes faith of tliRe
parts, notion, assent, and caa&-
dence 193. Polanus makes itafitO
and sure persuasion 195.

Fosdick's German Grammar 507.

Fourth year of study at Andover 309.

Fragments from the study of a pistor
507.

France^ state of religion in 497.

G.

Genesis, commentary on, by Ptol
Bush 241.

Geneva Evangelical Sode^ 496.

Geology and RevdaHan. l.Tbel^
parent discrepancy between ifc
deductions of geology and the Mo-
saic account respecting the i^ »
the world 2. The latter misDnde^
Blood 3. Explained 4. Objectiaif
answered 7. Geology illostntef
and supports revelation, by tescfc-
ing that this world had a begis-
ning 8. That it is the worbMS-
ship of one God, etc. 9. That iseB
and the present races of uuBah
have existed on it only a few thra*
sand years 10. That it hai bcei
covered with a deluge 11. Thitit
will be destroyed by fire, etc IS.
The disappointment of infidels 1&
An appeal to the reader 18.

Gormaiy, 614.

„ works lately publisbed in S3.

German Crrantmar 507.

Gesenius on Phoenician monuBenti
noticed 492.

Gcspdf Matthew's, inquiry n^^
ing the original language of, ele.
315.

Grammar, critical, of the Hetae*
language, notice of 947.

Index.

519

Gr94U Britotft, intelligence from 613.
GreeMntghy W. W. on the Tenlon of

UlphiUs and the Moeeo- Gothic

Ungoage 295.
Gvizat on civilization in Europe 503.

U.

Harvard UmversUy, alterations in
coarse of study 509.

Head of the Church Head over all
things, concluded 22.

Hebrew language^ reasons for the
study of 113. Importance attached
to it by the earliest planters of
New England 114. It is the com-
mon privilege of all the professions
118. Examples in France, Eng-
land, and Germany 119. It
strengthens the &ith of the student
in the genuineness and authority
of the Scriptures 122. Its influ-
ence on the imagination and taste
126. Its bearing upon the mission-
ary enterprise 129.

Heibrew language, a critical grammar
of, by 1. Nordheimer, notice of
247.

HengsUnberg on the causes of the
denial of the Mosaic origin of the
Pentateuch 458.

Hickok, Rev. Prof. L. P. Authority
a source of moral obligation 276.

HnU, Aev. Edwin, on Universalism
70.

Home EdueaHonj by the author of
Natural History of Enthusiasm, no-
tice of 251.

Hubbardf F. M. Translation of
SchweighaQser on the theology of
Socrates 47.

I.

iiUelUetual System of the Ujuverse,
Cudworth's, notice of 242.

iTUdUgenee^ literary and miscellane-
ous 253.

Italy, 515.

Jerusalem, antiquities of 512.

L.
Landis, Rev. R W. Views of the

early reformers on justification,

faith, and the active obedience of

Christ 179 and 420.
Ubrarjf of the New York theological

semmary 253.

Lovnoy, Rev. E. P., memoir of noticed

M.

MartineoM, Miss Harriet, works of
reviewed 389. Her northern birth
suspected 390. Her prepos.«essions
in our favor, means of information,
at home everywhere except among
orthodox Christians, Unitarians her
chosen companions 391. Her re-
marks on political institutions and
distinguished men 392. Her sec-
tion on the << political non-exist-
ence of women severely censured
303. Its morality considered ^96,
Its bearing upon slaves and free
blacks 398. Her contempt of
women 400. The absurdity of
mingling men and women in the
same employments 401. Its moral
bearing, the character of the man
where it prevails 402. Her views
of marriage and divorce exposed
4U6. Ours is an astonishing age
408. The tendency of Miss M's
writings to infidelity 410. Her re-
marks on ** the first people of Bos-
ton,"— her views in regard to mis-
sions 411. On Or. Beecher, revi-
vals of religion, Miss Sedgwick,
etc. 412. L^ose views of the Sab-
bath 413. Her censures of the
American clergy 415. The Unita-
rian clergy 417.

Matthew's Uospel, inauiry into the
original language or, and the gen-
uineness of the first two chapters
of the same, with particular refer-
ence to Mr. Norton s view of these
subjects 133. Introductory re-
marks 133. Testimony of the
christian fiithers 135. rapias 136.
Remarks concerning 137. His
testimony a fair subject of investi-
gation 140. The testimony of Ue-
gesippus 1 41 . Of Sjmmachns 142.
The gospel according to the He-
brews was interpolated and spuri-
ous 144. Examples 147. Its re-
semblance to the canonical Mat-
thew 149. Its claims to canonical
authority suspected by the ancient
fathers 154. Evidence in fiivor of
a Hebrew gospel of Matthew 158.
Remarks un the same 159. Other
circumstances which render the
existence of an early genuine He-

■mo of ITIphiU
■ntlemeiit of tite North tsi Mal^
of Konjpr. Eailf hntarj of Hk
GcTmui, Temonic DcGalhk Inbn
2n6. Appeu &nt in hiniiij 13
jTKn B. C. Tbeit emi{ni»cii
prolMblT compnlaory W. A. D.
37i>. tlonia wu utignti ik
Cbriniui Gothi u > midncr.
Theawm.rlc.HSlS. TbeVtiM
oftbr Kble br Ulphilu into Haw.
Gothic, tbe Gm tHciiriRi of Gn-
BtaB fhentnie. Sonie ueinini^
Clpbilu 300. Hu innntiin of
the Mono-Gotbic AlphilieL Tlx
mmc letten in Ofe fnm tbt n-
notrat afaSOI. Tbt Goda k-
^nahited with Ibe Gmkud Lttn
alpbBlwta 303. Tb« Vmin i'
Triphjlas prav^ to hire bniiDtuir
finm the Greek 305. Tbt ptO
Talne oF tba rrnioa UKiwi W
Frazmenti of it only itnuia K.
Othrr reEicls of t&r lin|iB(r,
ennoiu 3>KI. Somr accooDl ofur
0. Aptt-

?lc. 311.
KrrW (Migtaion, Aatboiilr Ik

Jfen-um Educmtioa SocicIt la?-

Jfc>>»> Origin of lie fmUr^

Ciaan of the Denial of the tx.

M.
-Veto Vor* Bar, a mpmbcr oTii Fi»

-Veti York TheoloffiaU Srmintrj.l^

•i. FKXa il- brary of 253.

.Bio,„-ii mi.. JVVrrfAfimiT, Or. I. A critir*] •nn-

r ain^aes IW. mm af thp Hebrew Un.-OM?, »■

,... iltnm.«ion» ticeof^ir. °^

rj«iUiaM«jfi»S Te»i. AiirrfAtinirr. I'lof I. on Ibe Phrtw

■ d in leu phy of EccloBJaatea l!>7.

-Nrfd ei- JVoficcj, Critital SSe, J'y,

/

i»t place

OMiauf. artirr, ofChrifl. Vitmrf

.(faesya.

tbe harjy Ri-lnrmeif on 4-.1>- T^

fT. The

posilion of Dr. Junkln .»! Wr.
Borno un this .ubjccl »if!.">^

l<M. A

tbfircB.

in » rol,. 4211 A befitf .ii IV

combiDc

flheolo-
iDcalioD

dicnco not nccrttttj to conrtl
view* of jiisltficslion «l. TT*

-ill).

question unknown UU rfn lif

Index.

531

a

death of CalTin422. The language
of the first reformers in anison
with tiiat of the primitive church
423. Testimony of Calvin 424. Of
the Heidelbercr Catechism 428. Of
the venerable Ursinus 430. Pisca-
tor 431. The Belgic Confession

432. Dr. Parens says the passive
obedience alone is imputed to us

433. Dr. Araandus Polanus 434.
Differs from Piscator with caution
435. Dr. Gromar agrees substan-
tially 439. The Synod of Dort
440. Tilenus 441. Remarkable
agreement. Wendeline 443. Pro>
nounces that a horrible opinion
which denies that the passive obe-
dience is imputed to us 448. Om-
elusion 452. The views of the
Reformers the same as those which
are censored by some as heretical
iii the Presbyterian Church, etc.
454.

Obligatiant mordl^ authority a source
of 276.

Organizations f Voluntarv and Ec-
clesiastical, for benevolent ob-
jects 257.

Original Language of Matthew's
Gospel, etc. 133, 315.

Ozfora University 511.

P.

Parker J Rev. Samuel, journal of an
exploring tour beyond the Rocky
Mountains, notice of 250.

Parsons's Biblical Analysis 506.

Pentateuchf causes of the denial of
the Mosaic origin of the 458. The
tendency of the age to Naturalism
458. Opinions of De Wette on the
Pentateuch 465. Theism ffiving
place to pantheism 466. E^rts of
Vatke 467. Btrauss's Life of Jesus

468. Opinions on the decalogue

469. Further opinions of Strauss
and Vatke 471. Principle of sub-
jectivity 472. Errors of Reimarus
and von Bohlen 473. Remark of
Goethe illustrated, << as is the man,
so is his Gx>d," 474. Denial of the
genuineness of the Pentateuch
aided by dislike to its principal
personages 475 . I ncapac i ty of un-
derstanding the spirit of the Penta-
teuch 476. Stagnation of inmiiry
477. De W^tte, von Bohlen, Vat-

ke, etc., deny the Mosaic origin of
the Pentateuch altogether 479.
Eichhorn, Staodlin, and others,
maintain the Mosaic origin of very
important portions of Uie Penta-
teuch 479. Jahn's hypothesis does
not meet the case 481 . Bleek an
able and candid writer 481. Ex-
ternal evidence for the troth of the
Bible too much overlooked 482.
Others maintain the genuineness
of the Pentateuch in its present
form 483. Among these are Jahn,
Hug, Movers, etc. 484. Views of
Meyer, Bauer, Bertholdt, etc. 485.
In the opinion of De Wette, the
Pentateuch is poetry, except it is
wanting in metre 486. Bauer and
Vatke *s opinion 488. Great variety
of opinions on the relation of the
different books to each other 489.
Prospect for the future 490.

Philips, Robert, life and times of
George Whitefield, notice of 248.

Philosophy of Ecclesiastes 197.

Physical history of mankind by J. C.
Prichard 238.

Phoenician language and writing 492.

Popular treatise on medical pliiloso-
phv, notice of j^.

PoTidy Rev. Enoch D. D. on Geolo-
gy and revelation 1.

Presbyterian Churchy state of presby-
terianism a review of the leading
measures of the General Assembly
of 1837 219. Remarks on the
pam[5hlet by a member of the New
York Bar. Its striking and season-
able appearance 220. Two bodies
claiming to be the General As-
sembly 221. Previous character
and position of the Presbyterian
Church 222. Causes of present
divisions 223. Sketch of the early
history of the Presbvterian Church
and its pro^-ess 225. Leading
principles of its government 228.
Resolutions of the General As-
sembly of 1837 examined 229.
The plan of union 230. Remarks
on 2:)1. The declaration of the
resolutions of 1837 absurd !^.
The lawful constitution of the
General Assembly of 1838 234.
Concluding remarks 235.

Prohus, or Rome in the third^century
noticed 494.

530

bidex.

brew Matthew improbable 163.
Objections examined 170. Was
not the grospel according to the He-
brews a translation from the Greek
original of Matthew? 174. Con-
clusion 177.

The same subject continued. In-
trodactorj remarks 315. Positive
evidence of the genuineness of
Matthew 1. 11. 317. All the man-
uscript copies and ancient versions
contain them 317. Always found
in the Greek gospel. Quoted bv
Justin Martyr 319. Also b^ Cel-
sus 324. flemarks on this evi-
dence ^6. Internal evidence of
genuineness 327. Objections ex-
amined, viz. The gospel of the Ebi-
onites did not contain it 330. The
Proievangelium probably did not,
etc. 331 . Seeming contradictions.
Mr. Norton's arguments considered
332. The genealogies given bv
Matthew and Luke compared 333.
Other objections 339. The Ma^
344. The star seen by them 34o.
Not a matter of astrology :)oO. Re-
sult of the preceding inquiries 353.
Additional considerations 354.

Mayer, Lewis, D. D. on the scriptural
idea of angels 356.

Medical vhHosopky, a popular treatise
on. Notice of 239.

Meditations on the last days of Christ
496.

Missionary Schools 87. Extent of
territory embraced by the Apostoli-
cal missions 88. State of Educa-
tion in those countries 90. Schools
and public libraries 92. Facts il-
lustrative of the Apostolical mis-
sions 94. The gifl of tongues 98.
Circumstances of modern missions
contrasted with those of the N. Test.
99. They are prosecuted in less
civilized countries 10t>. Need ex-
traneous influences 101. Intellec-
tual degradation of the present
heathen world 102. What place
education should hold in the sys-
tem of modern missions 107. 1 he
testimony of experience 108. A
general rule in respect to their es-
tablishment 109. Should combine
the college and the school of theolo-
gyjl 10. The claims of education
among the oriental churches 111.

Moeso-Qothic LoMguags^ the Vfr-
sion of Ulphilas £l5. Origisal
settlement of the North and Middle
of Europe. Early history of the
Crerman, Teatonic or Gotmc thin
295. Appear first in histoiy 19
years B. C. Their emigxatiofli

Srobablv compulsory 297. A.D.
76, Moesia was assigned tbe
Christian Gotha as a resideiMe.
Their wars, etc. 299. Tbe Vermm
of the Bible by Ulphilas intoHoeso-
Gothic, the first specimen of Gfr-
man literature. Some acconntol'
Ulphilas 300. His invention of
the Moeso-Gothic Alphabet He
runic letters in use firom tbe ie-
motest ages 301. The Goths sd-
quainted with the Greek and Utia
alphabets 903. The Venion of
Ulphilas proved to have beenmtde
from the Greek 305. Tbe greit
value of this version asserted 306.
Fragments of it only remain 31)7.
Otlier relicts of tne lan^ifp,
curious 309. Some account of w
Germanic languages 310. A par*
ticular account ofthe Moeso-Gothie
etc. 311.
Moral OUigatioH^ Authority tbe

source of 276.
Morrison Education Society iVS,
Mosaic Origin of the Ptntat(td,
Causes ofthe Denial of the 406.

N.

JV*ei0 York Bar, a member of on Pres-
byterian ism 219.

JVew York Theological SenuRong, Li-
brary of 253.

JfordhcimtTf Dr. I. A critical gram-
mar of tht» Hebrew Lan^oagf , «»-
tice of 247.

Jfordhcimer, Prof 1. on tbe Phtlo*-
phy of Ecclesiastes 197.

J^otUes, Cr'Uical 238, 4J«,

Obedience, actire, of Christ, View* of
the Karly Reformers on 4*i0. The
position of Dr. Junk In and Mr.
Barnes on this subject eip)t«»<^
in a noto 420 \ belief m ^
imputation of Christ's activf <*^
die nee not necrwary to correct
views of justification A'Z\. To«
question uoknown till s^ ^

J

Index*

531

death of Calvin 422. The language
of the first reformen in unison
with that of the primitive church
423. Testimony of Calvin 424. Of
the Heidelberg Catechism 428. Of
the venerable Ursinus 430. Pisca-
tor 431. The Belgic Confession

432. Dr. Parens says the passive
obedience alone is imputed to us

433. Dr. Aroandus rolanus 434.
Differs from Piscator with caution
435. Dr. Gomar agrees substan-
tially 439. The Synod of Dort
440. Tilenus 441. Remarkable
agreement. Wendeline 443. Pro>
nounces that a horrible opinion
which denies that the passive obe-
dience is imputed to us 448. Conr
elusion 452. The views of the
Reformers the same as those which
are cenaured by some as heretical
iii the Presbyterian Church, etc.
454.

OhligaJtioni moral, authority a source
of 276.

OrganixaJtions, Voluntarv and Ec-
clesiastical, for benevolent ob-
jects 257.

Original Langtiags of Matthew's
Gospel, etc. 133, 315.

Oxfora Univerhty 511.

P.

Parker^ Rev. Samuel, journal of an
exploring tour beyond the Rocky
Mountains, notice of 250.

Parsons* s Biblical Analysis 506.

Pentateuch^ causes of the denial of
the Mosaic origin of the 458. The
tendency of the age to Naturalism
458. Opinions of De Wette on the
Pentateuch 4G5. Theism giving
place to pantheism 466. Efforts of
VaUce 467. Btrauss's Life of Jesus

468. Opinions on the decalogue

469. Further opinions of Strauss
and Vatke 471 . Principle of sub-
jectivity 472. Errors of Reimarus
and yon fiohlen 473. Remark of
Goethe illustrated, << as is the man,
so is his God,*' 474. Denial of the
genuineness of the Pentateuch
aided by dislike to its principal
personages 475. Incapacity of un-
derstanding the spirit of the Penta-
teuch 476. Stagnation of inquiry
477. De W^tte, von Bohlen, Vat-

ke, etc., deny the Mosaic origin of
the Pentateuch altogether 479.
Eichhorn, StaOdlin, and others,
maintain the Mosaic origin of very
important portions of Uie Penta*
tench 479. Jahn's hypothesis does
not meet the case 481 . BIcek an
able and candid writer 481. Ex-
ternal evidence for the truth of the
Bible too much overlooked 482.
Others maintain the genuineness
of the Pentateuch in its present
form 483. Among these are Jahn,
Hug, Movers, etc. 484. Views of
Meyer, Bauer, Berthnldt, etc. 485.
In the opinion of De Wette, the
Pentateuch is poetry, except it is
wanting in metre 486. Bauer and
Vatke 's opinion 488. Great variety
of opinions on the relation of the
different books to each other 489.
Prospect for the future 490.

Philips, Robert, life and times of
George Whitefield, notice of 248.

Philosophy of Ecclesiastes 197.

Physical history of mankind by J. C.
Prichard 238.

Phoenician language and writing 492.

Popular treatise on medical philoso-
phv, notice of 239.

PoTidy Rev. Enoch D. D. on Geolo-
gy and revelation 1 .

Presbyterian Church, state of presby-
terianism a review of the leading
measures of the General Assembly
of J 837 219. Remarks on the
pam{$hlet by a member of the New
York Bar. Its striking and season-
able appearance 220. Two bodies
claiming to be the General As-
sembly 221. Previous character
and position of the Presbyterian
Church 222. Causes of present
divisions 223. Sketch of the early
history of the Presbyterian Church
and its progress 225. Leading
principles of its government 228. '
Resolutions of the General As-
sembly of 1837 examined 229.
The plan of union 230. Remarks
on 2:n. The declaration of the
resolutions of 1837 absurd 233.
The lawful constitution of the
General Assembly of 1838 234.
Concluding remarks 235.

Prohus, or Rome in the third^century
noticed 494.

532

Index,

Q.

Q^ackery and imposture in medicine,
an exposition ()f, bj Dr. Ticknor,
notice of 239.

R.

Reasons for the study of the Hebrew
Language 113.

RedSeablO,

Reformers J the early, Views of, on
Faith and the Active obedience of
Christ 179, 420.

Researches into tlie physical history
of mankind by J. C.'Prichard, no-
tice of 238.

Revelation^ Geoloflr, etc. 1.

Review of Miss Slartineau's Works
389.

Robinson, Dr., Tour in Egypt and the
Holy Land 510.

Rocky mountuins, toar beyond, no-
tice of 250.

S.

Sandemanianism 504.

SckaugUr's Meditations noticed 496.

Schools, Missionary 67.

Schweighauser on the theology of
Socrates 47.

Scriptural idea of Angels 356.

Skmpard, Rev. John, on Religion in
France 497.

Sickness in the West Indies 496.

Sinai Mt, Robinson's visit at 511 .

Socrates, the theology of 47.

Springes Fragments 507.

Statistical Societu of London 495.

Steams, Rev, Samuel H. life and
select discourses of, notice of 245.

Stuart, ^rof. M. Inquiry respecting
the orifirinal language of Matthew's
Gospel, etc. 133,315.

Study of the Hebrew language, rea-
sons for the 113.

T.

Taylor, Mrs. Sarah Louisa, memoir
of, noticed 253.

Theron and ^spasio, Letters on 504.

The Theology of Socrates. Preface
47. State of Theology among the
Greeks. Poets and priests 48.
The older Grecian philosophers.
Anazagoras 49. The Sophists 50.
Socrates' manner of teaching. The
character of his mind 52. The
way in which he came to the

knowledge of the true God, ai in-
telligent 56. Omnipotent, good
and wise 58. The voodneM of
God to all men 59. His can of
individuals; divination, etc. 61.
God is every where, — is invisible
— is one 65.' Necessity of divioe
worship 66. Outward and inward
67. Conclusion 69.

Ticknor, Caleb M. D. on medial
philosophy and qoackery, notice of
235),

Townsend's Chronological Aiiiii|e-
ment 500.

Traffic in spirituous liquors 499.

Tyler, Prof W. S. on the Analogies
between Nature, Providence and
Grace 22.

U.

Ulphilas, the version of, and the
Moeso- Gothic language 295. *

Universalism, weapons of,reverBed 7t).
Universalism brings affainat G<nI
the charge of partiality 71 . Death,
of infiints 71. Remorse 72. Htf
righteous subjected to many sor-
rows 73. The most holy men per-
secuted 75. Men die in the very
act of atrocious wickedness 76.
Universalism charges God with
incompetency 77. Conflicta with
the benevolence of God 80.

V,

Van Ess Library 509.

Views of the Early R^ormers on
Justification, Faith and the aetiv«
obedience of Chrisri79, 420.

Voluntary and Ecclesiastical Orgsn-
izations for the promotion of be-
nevolent obiects ^7. Some think
that all objects of benevolence
should be accomplished by the
church, as a divinely orgsmtti
body. But what do you mean i^
the church f 258. Tbe irorf,
church as here used, accurate^
defined, and difficulties siigves^*
etc. 259. The position that the
scriptures authorize only os« pnl^
lie association of men, tne church,
for benevolent objects, considered,

261. The existence of clashing
sects, contrary to the word of God

262. Yet these together conatitDte
the church of Christ, as it now is

Lidex.

523

203. The objection that a anion
of Christians of different denomina-
tions is of <*?n/in'fiievuin^" con-
sidered 263. Of those who main-
tain that the Bible authorizes only
one association y etc. each sect acts
by itself 264. To act ecclesiasti-
cally in all works of benevolence
would be attended with special
difficulties in New England 265.
Formation of the A. B. C. F. M.
2()5. Responsibility of voluntary
societies considered 266. The
right of voluntary societies illus-
trated 267. Their necessity in New
England urged 268. Expedient to
leave the door open for different

modes 269. There should be no
strife 270. The occasional abuse
of the voluntary principle, no ar-
gument against tne principle 272.
Caution against innovations 273.

W.

Weapons of Vmversalism reversed 70.

Wkitefield, George, life and times of,
notice of 248.

Wiseman, Nicholas D. D. on the
doctrines and practices of the
Catholic Church, notice of 243.

Woods, Rev. Leonard, D. D. re-
marks on Voluntary and Ecclesi-
astical organizations for benevolent
objects 297.

Errata. Owing to the unavoidable absence of a person connected with
the press, when two or three sheets were printed, a few errors crept
in. — P. 34, 2d line from bottom, for sufusoria read infusoria; p. 35, 11th line
from bottom, for See read Sic ; for sidtis read actio ; 10th line from bottom,
for perfecHs rewd perfectio ; 4th line from bottom, for Infusonia read Infusoria ;
bottom line, for Ebsenberg read Ehrenberg ; p. 36, bottom line, for Rodget
read Roget; p. 41, 14th Tine from bottom, for evangelical read analogical;
p. 43, 6ui line from bottom, for Jlorian read Ionian; p. S^, middle ofpage,
for Qarcen read Garcin ; p. 256, 9th line from bottom, for Panthier read Pau-
thier; p. 512, middle ofpage, for Yafxa is probably meant Jajfa, though it is
printed as it is written in the manuscript ; (and so of some of the others ;)
line 19th from bottom, for HinnoH read Hinnom,