Chapter XII: Appendix: A Bishop Horsley on the double sense of Prophecy 257 (8)

[45] 2 Tim. i. 13, 14: ii. 2. Also 1 Tim. vi. 20. On both places, Dr. Wordsworth's _Notes_ may be consulted with advantage.

[46] 2 Tim. iv. 3.

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

[48] Art. XX.

[49] Art. VIII.

[50] I allude especially to the terrible castigation he has individually received at the hands of the Bishop of Exeter. See _the Times_, of March 4th, 1861.

[51] "And when the Angel stretched out his hand upon Jerusalem to destroy it, the LORD ... said to the Angel that destroyed the people," &c. "And the Angel of the LORD was by the threshing-place of Araunah the Jebusite."--2 Sam. xxiv. 16.

"The Angel of the LORD stood by the threshing-floor of Ornan the Jebusite. And David lifted up his eyes, and saw the Angel of the LORD stand between the Earth and the Heaven, having a drawn sword in his hand stretched out over Jerusalem."--1 Chron. xxi. 15, 16.

[52] Acts i. 20.

[53] _On the Creed_, Art. iv. p. 244, _notes_ (_u_) and (_x_).

[54] "It would take no great space," (says Dr. Pusey,) "to shew that the rendering 'as a lion,' is unmeaning, without authority, against authority; while the rendering 'they pierced' is borne out alike by authority and language."

[55] Ver. 1,--St. John xii. 38. Rom. x. 16. Ver. 4,--St. Matth. viii. 17. Ver. 4 to 11,--1 St. Pet. ii. 24, 25. Ver. 7 and 8,--Acts viii. 32. Ver. 12,--St. Mark xv. 28. St. Luke xxii. 37.

[56] Mal. iv. 5.

[57] St. Luke i. 17.

[58] As the Fathers generally teach. See Brown's _Ordo Sæclorum_, pp. 702-3, &c., &c.

[59] And yet,--"I go to prepare _a place_ for you!"--St. John xiv. 2.

[60] See, for example, p. 60, (_lower half_,) p. 62, (_middle_,) &c.

[61] Comp. p. 45.

[62] Col. ii. 11, 12. Rom. ii. 29. Phil. iii. 3, &c.

[63] _Edinburgh Review_, (Ap. 1861,) p. 429.

[64] _Analogy_, P. II. ch. ii., _ad fin._

[65] _Analogy_, P. II. ch. iii., _ad init._

[66] Van Mildert's _Historical View of the Rise and Progress of Infidelity_, &c. Serm. xxi., (ed. 1806,) vol. ii. pp. 313-17.

[67] "Columbus' prediction of the eclipse to the native islanders, was as true an argument to them as if the event had really been supernatural." p. 115.

[68] St. Mark viii. 19, 20.

[69] St. John ix.

[70] St. John xi. 44.

[71] Consider St. John iii. 2, (referring to ii. 23 and iv. 45.) So ix. 16: x. 21 and 38: xiv. 10, 11. Also xv. 24; and consider St Luke vii. 16: also 21, 22: St. Matth. xii. 22, 23: St. John vii. 31: xii. 17-19.

[72] St. John v. 44. Comp. vii. 17: viii. 12. St. Matth. v. 8. Ps. xix. 8: cxix. 100. Also, Ecclus. i. 26: xxi. 11.--"There is," (says an excellent living writer,) "scarcely any doctrine or precept of our SAVIOUR more distinctly and strongly stated, than that the capacity for judging of, and for believing the Truths of Christianity, depends upon Moral Goodness, and the practice of Virtue."--Let us hear our own Hooker on this subject:--"We find by experience that although Faith be an intellectual habit of the mind, and have her seat in the understanding, yet an evil moral disposition obstinately wedded to the love of darkness dampeth the very light of heavenly illumination, and permitted not the Mind to see what doth shine before it."--_Eccl. Pol._, B. v.c. lxiii. § 2.

[73] St. John xi. 44.

[74] P. 113. The italics are in the original.

[75] See the _Quarterly Review_, (on Prof. Baden Powell's "Order of Nature,")--for Oct. 1859, (No. 212,) pp. 420-3.

[76] p. 169.--"Priests have neither been, as some would represent, a set of deliberate conspirators against the free thoughts of mankind; nor, on the other hand," &c. _Ibid._--How partial becomes the judgment, when we have to discuss the merits of our own order!

[77] _Ans._ Clearly in the relation of a blessing which has by all means to be communicated to them.

[78] _Ans._ Certainly there is. Those which most obviously present themselves are such as the following:--St. Matth. ix. 37, 38: xxviii. 19, 20. St. Luke xxiv. 47. Acts ii. 38, 39, &c.

[79] _Analogy_, P. II. c. vi.

[80] Rom. v. 12.

[81] 1 Cor. xv. 22.

[82] Eph. ii. 3.

[83] _Analogy_, P. II. c. v. note (d).

[84] Col. i. 23.--p. 155.

[85] See Nelson's _Life of Bp. Bull_, p. 245.

[86] See Nelson's _Life of Bp. Bull_, p. 242.

[87] "The horizon which his view embraced was _much narrower_ than St. Paul's,"--who had enlarged his mind by foreign travel, (p. 168.)

In a note, we are informed that "at any rate his Gospel cannot, by external evidence, be attached to the person (!) of St. John as its author." "Many persons," (it is added,) "shrink from a _bonâ fide_ examination of the 'Gospel question,' because they imagine, that unless the four Gospels are received as ... entirely the composition of the persons whose names they bear, and without any admixture of legendary matter or embellishment in their narratives, the only alternative is to suppose a fraudulent design in those who did compose them." (p. 161.) ... May one who has _not_ shrunk from 'the Gospel question' be permitted to regret that the Reverend writer has not specified the charges which he thus vaguely brings against the Gospels? _What_, pray, is the legendary matter; and _which_ are the embellishments?

In the same page we read of "the first, or genuine, epistle of St. Peter." Is not his _second_ epistle genuine, then?

[88] See above, p. lviii.

[89] "Pleas for 'liberty of conscience' and 'freedom of opinion,'" (as on excellent writer has recently pointed out,) "can have neither place nor pretext, while there is liberty, for all who choose, to decline joining the Church of England; _and freedom, for all who choose, to leave her_."--Rev. C. Forster's 'Spinoza Redivivus,' (1861,) p. 6.

[90] In what part of the Bible, (one begs respectfully to inquire,) is one called upon to "accept the story of an arresting of the Earth's motion, or of a reversal of its motion?" ... Would it not be as well to be truthful in one's references to the Bible?

[91] See below, p. 68.

[92] See Butler's _Analogy_, P. II. c. iii.

[93] _Quarterly Review_, Jan. 1861, p. 275.

[94] Take a few as a specimen:--"A great restraint is supposed to be imposed upon the Clergy by reason of their subscription to the Thirty-nine Articles. Yet it is more difficult than might be expected, to define what is the extent of the legal obligation of those who sign them; and in this case, the strictly legal obligation is the measure of the moral one. Subscription may be thought even to be _inoperative upon the conscience_ by reason of its vagueness. For the act of subscription is enjoined, but its effect or meaning nowhere plainly laid down; and it does not seem to amount to more than an acceptance of the Articles of the Church as the formal law to which the subscriber is _in some sense_ subject. What that subjection amounts to, must be gathered elsewhere; for it does not appear on the face of the subscription itself."--(p. 181. See down to page 185.) Can equivocation such as this be read without a sense of humiliation and shame, as well as of disgust and abhorrence?

[95] p. 180 to p. 190.

[96] Heading of the XXXIX Articles.

[97] The reader is referred to some remarks on Ideology towards the close of Sermon VII., p. 243 to p. 251.

[98] "Unhappily, together with his _inauguration of Multitudinism_, Constantine also inaugurated a principle essentially at variance with it, the principle of _doctrinal limitation_." (p. 166.) ... "The opportunity of reverting to the freedom of the Apostolic, and immediately succeeding periods, was finally lost for many ages by the sanction given by Constantine to the decisions of Nicæa." (_Ibid._) "At all events, a principle at variance with a true Multitudinism was then recognised." (_Ibid._)

How does it happen, by the way, that one writing B.D. after his name, however bitter his animosity against the Nicene Creed may be, is not aware that Creeds are co-eval with Christianity? Thus we find the Creed of Carthage in the works of Cyprian, (A.D. 225,) and Tertullian, (A.D. 210, 203): that of Lyons in the works of Irenæus, (A.D. 180.) [see Heurtley's _Harmonia Symbolica_, pp. 7-20.] We recognize fragments of the Creed in Ignatius, (A.D. 90.) We hear St. Paul himself saying--=hypotypôsin eche hygiainontôn logôn, hôn= (i.e. _the words_ themselves!) =par' emou êkousas ... tên kalên parakatathêkên phylaxon=--2 Tim. i. 13, 14. A few more words on this subject will be found in the notice of Mr. Jowett's Essay.

[99] It is really impossible to argue with a man who informs us that "_previous to the time of the divided Kingdom_, the Jewish History presents little which is thoroughly reliable:" (p. 170:)--that "the greater probability seems on the side of the supposition, that the Priesthood, with its distinct offices and charge, was constituted by Royalty, and that _the higher pretensions of the priests were not advanced till the reign of Josiah_:" (_Ibid._:)--that, "The negative Theologian" demands "some positive elements in Christianity, on grounds more sure to him than _the assumption of an objective 'faith once delivered to the saints_,' which he cannot identify with the Creed of any Church as yet known to him:" (pp. 174-5:)--a man who can remark concerning the Bible, that,--"Those who are able to do so, ought to lead the less educated to distinguish between the different kinds of words which it contains, between _the dark patches of human passion and error which form a partial crust upon it_, and the bright centre of spiritual truth within." (p. 177.)

[100] _Quarterly Review_, (Jan. 1851,) No. 217, p. 259.

[101] A writer in the _Saturday Review_, (April 6, 1861,) in an admirable Article on the importance of retaining the office of 'Dean' in its integrity, (instead of suicidally merging it in the office of 'Bishop,') speaks of there being "no English Commentary on the New Testament brought up to the level of modern Theological Science." [As if "the level" had been rising of late!] "Butler and Paley are still our text-books on the Evidences; and we are defending _old beliefs_ behind wooden walls _against the rifled cannon and iron broadsides of modern Philosophy_."--p. 337. What a strange misapprehension of the entire question,--of the relation of Theological to Physical Science,--does such a sentence betray!

[102] See below, p. 235.

[103] As the excellent Townson observed long since,--"The brightness of countenance and raiment which dazzled and overcame the sight of His Apostles when He was Transfigured on the Mount, was to Him but _a ray of that glory in which He dwelt before the Worlds were made_."--Sermon on "The manner of our SAVIOUR'S Teaching,"--_Works_, vol. i. p. 282.

[104] St. Matth. xvii. 2.

[105] St. Mark ix. 3.

[106] 1 Tim. vi. 15, 16.--If it be more philosophical to suppose that the Light which shone upon the earth during the first three days proceeded from the Sun, (the orb of which remained invisible,) and not from any extraneous independent source,--I have no objection whatever to such a supposition,--or indeed to any other which suffers the inspired record to remain intact. I am by no means clear however that Philosophy (begging her pardon,) does not entirely mistake her office, when she pretends to explain the first chapter of Genesis. Hence, her constrained language, and unnatural manner, when she desires to be respectful,--her inconsequential remarks and perpetual blunders when she rather prefers to be irreligious. She is simply out of her element, and is discoursing of what _she does not understand_.--Theology, dealing with a physical problem by the method of Theological Science; and Philosophy, applying to a chapter in the Bible the physical method,--are alike at fault, and alike ridiculous. This truth, however obvious, does not seem to be generally understood.

But, (to return to the first three days of Creation,)--since the Author of Revelation seems to design that I should understand that Sun, Moon, and Stars not only did not come to view until the fourth day,--but also that they were not re-invested with their immemorial function and office until then,--I find no difficulty, _remembering with whom I have to do, even with Him who sowed the vault of Heaven so thick with stars, each one of which may be not a sun but a system_[107];--when, I say, I attend to the emphatic nature of the inspired record, on the one hand, and to GOD'S Omnipotence on the other,--I have no difficulty in supposing that He embraced the Sun in a veil, for just so long a period as it seemed Him good, and when He willed that it should re-appear, that He withdrew the veil again. The _name_ for the operation just now alluded to belongs to the province of Philosophy. Divinity is all the while thinking about something infinitely better and higher.

[107] Herschel.

[108] Gen. i. 6.

[109] Ibid. 20.

[110] Job xxxvii. 18.

[111] Ps. civ. 2.

[112] Is. xl. 22.

[113] Job xxvi. 8.

[114] Prov. xxx. 4.

[115] See also Job ix. 8. Even in Job xxxvii. 18, the sky is said to be "_spread out_." So Is. xlv. 12, &c.

[116] Job xxvi. 11.

[117] 2 Sam. xxii. 8.

[118] Ps. lxxviii. 23.

[119] Gen. vii. 11.

[120] Job ix. 6. Ps. lxxv. 3. See Blomfield's Glossary to Prom. Vinct. v. 357.

[121] Comp. Is. xxiv. 18.

[122] See Is. xxiv. 18 and Mal. iii. 10.

[123] =ekleipein tên hedran=. (Herod.) See Copleston's _Remains_, p. 107.

[124] _Eccl. Pol._ 1. iii. § 2.

[125] Gen. i. 26.

[126] "The difficulty," he says, (alluding to Gen. i. 1,) "lies in this, that the heaven is distinctly said to have been formed ... on the second day." (p. 226.) But this is the language of a man determined that there _shall_ be a difficulty. "The Heavens and the Earth" clearly denote, (in the simple phraseology of a primitive age,) the sum of all created things; the great transaction which Nehemiah has so strikingly expounded:--"Heaven, _the Heaven of Heavens, with all their host_,--the Earth and all things that are therein;" including "the sea, with all that is therein." (Neh. ix. 6.) Whereas "the firmament" of ver. 6, (which GOD called "Heaven" in ver. 8,) _can_ only indicate the blue vault immediately overhead, wherein fowls fly. (ver. 20.) If this be _not_ the meaning of Gen. i. 1, one half of the phrase is "proleptical,"--the other half not: for the creation of Earth is nowhere recorded, if not in ver. 1.... But surely it is a waste of words to discuss such "difficulties" as these.

[127] Consider especially Heb. iv. 9 and 10; and consider, (besides Exod. xx. 11,) Deut. v. 15. See also Col. ii. 17.

[128] "There have been found within the area of these islands upwards of 15,000 species of once living things, _every one differing specifically from those of the present Creation_. Agassiz states that, with the exception of one small fossil fish, (discovered in the clay-stones of Greenland,) _he has not found any creature of this class, in all the Geological strata, identical with any fish now living_." (Pattison's _The Earth and the World_, p. 27.)

[129] I allude to such passages as the following,--all of which are to be found in Mr. Goodwin's Essay:--

"We are asked to believe that a vision of creation was presented to him (Moses) by Divine power, for the purpose of enabling him to inform the world of what he had seen; which vision inevitably led him to give a description which has misled the world for centuries, and in which the truth can now only with difficulty be recognized." (p. 247.) "The theories [of Hugh Miller and of Dr. Buckland] assume that appearances only, not facts, are described; and that, in riddles which would never have been suspected to be such, had we not arrived at the truth from other sources." (p. 249.) "For ages, this simple view of Creation satisfied the wants of man, and formed a sufficient basis of theological teaching:" but "modern research now shews it to be physically untenable." (p. 253.)

"The writer asserts solemnly and unhesitatingly that for which he must have known that he had no authority." But this was only because "the early speculator was harassed by no such scruples" as "arise from our modern habits of thought, and from the modesty of assertion (!) which the spirit of true science has taught us." He therefore "asserted as facts what he knew in reality only as probabilities.... He had seized one great truth.... With regard to details, observation failed him."--(pp. 252-3.)

[130] p. 329.

[131] pp. 307-309.

[132] Notice prefixed to _Essays and Reviews_.

[133] p. 255.

[134] Nos. 74, 76, 78, 81.

[135] I allude particularly to the late Hugh James Rose, B.D.

[136] Neh. iv. 17, 18.

[137] St. Luke xviii. 8.

[138] See Nelson's _Life of Bull_, p. 329, &c.

[139] See his admirable Preface.

[140] Newman's dedication of his 'Lectures on Romanism and popular Protestantism.'

[141] See the 'Monitum' prefixed to Dr. Routh's _Testimonia De Auctoritate S. Scripturæ Ante-Nicæna.--Reliqq. Sacræ_, vol. v. p. 335.

[142] "In 1781, the first Sunday School was established in England by Robert Raikes, a publisher and bookseller in Gloucester."--National Society's _Circular_.

[143] _Primary Charge_, at the end of his _Sermons_.

[144] Rev. M. Pattison, in _Essays and Reviews_, p. 307.

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

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

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

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

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

[150] "It is remarkable that the word =Graphê=, which means simply _Writing_, is reserved and appropriated in the New Testament (where it occurs fifty times) to the _Sacred_ writings, i.e. to the _Holy Scriptures_; and marks the separation of the _Scriptures_ from all "common books," indeed from _all other writings_ in the world."--Wordsworth 'On Inspiration,'--p. 85.

[151] St. Luke xvi. 17.

[152] =ou dynatai lythênai hê graphê=,--St. John x. 35.

[153] e.g. (i) _Long passages_:--

Judges i. 11-15 quotes Joshua xv. 15-19.--2 Sam. xxii. quotes Ps. xviii.--1 Chron. xvi. quotes Ps. xcvi., and Ps. cv.--2 Kings xix. quotes Is. xxxvii.--2 Kings xx. quotes Is. xxxviii., xxxix.

(ii) _One or two sentences_:--

Numb. xiv. 18 quotes Exod. xxxvi. 6, 7.--Ps. lxviii. 1 quotes Numb. x. 35.--Ps. lxviii. 7, 8 quotes Judges v. 4, 5.--Ps. cxviii. 14 quotes Exod. xv. 2.--Prov. xxx. 5 quotes Ps. xviii. 30.--Joel ii. 13 quotes Jonah iv. 2.--Isaiah xii. 2 quotes Exod. xv. 2.--Isaiah xiii. 6 quotes Joel i. 15.--Isaiah li. 6 quotes Ps. cii. 25-7.--Isaiah lii. 10 quotes Ps. xcviii. 2, 3.--Micah iv. 1, 2, 3 quotes Isaiah ii. 2, 3, 4.--Nahum i. 15 quotes Isaiah lii. 7.--Zeph. iii. 19 quotes Micah iv. 6.--Habakkuk ii. 14 quotes Isaiah xi. 9.--Jeremiah x. 13: li. 16 quotes Ps. cxxxv. 7.--Jeremiah xlviii. quotes Isaiah xv. 16.--Jeremiah xxvi. 18 quotes Micah iii. 12.--1 Chron. xxix. 15 quotes Ps. xxxix. 12.

(iii) _Allusive references_.--(This would involve a prolonged reference to the Hebrew Scriptures, which would be even out of place here.)

[154] See pp. 234-5.

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

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

[157] E.g. Gen. xxviii. 11, 12: xxxii. 1-3. Exod. xxiv. 10.--St. Luke xxii. 43-45. St. Matth. xxvii. 52, 53. St. Jude ver. 9.

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

[159] E.g. Gen. viii. 9: xxxvii. 15-17: xlviii. 17, 18. Exod. ii. 6.--St. Luke viii. 55. St. John xiii. 4, 5: xxi.

[160] E.g. in Heb. viii. 8-12, where Jer. xxxi. 31-36 is quoted. See Acts ii. 17-21, where Joel ii. 28-32 is quoted.

[161] It is supposed that the three well-known references to profane writers, (Acts xvii. 28. 1 Cor. xv. 33. Tit. i. 12, [concerning which see Jerome, _Opp._ i. 424: vii. 471,])--the place in St. Matthew, (xxvii. 9,)--and St. James iv. 5,--are scarcely exceptions to the statement in the text.

[162] See above,--(=4=).

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

[164] Only found in St. Luke iii. 36.

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

[166] Only found in Acts vii. 16.

[167] Only found in Acts vii. 23.

[168] St. James v. 17,--mentioned also by our LORD, St. Luke iv. 25; who informs us that Jonah _was a sign_ to the Ninevites. This is only revealed in St. Luke xi. 30.

[169] 2 Cor. xi. 3.

[170] St. Jude ver. 9.

[171] 2 Tim. iii. 8.

[172] See Heb. xi. 19. Consider Rom. iv. 19.

[173] Acts vii. 16.

[174] Compare Exod. ii. 2, 3 with Acts vii. 20. Consider Rev. ii. 14: also Heb. xii. 21: also Heb. ix. 19, &c.

[175] _Sermons_, by the Rev. C. P. Eden, p. 185.

[176] =Ti gar estin ho Nomos? Euangelion prokatêngelmenon· ti de to Euangelion? Nomos peplêrômenos.= Justin: _Quæst._ ci. p. 456.

[177] Eadem sunt in Vetere et Novo: ibi obumbrata, hic revelata; ibi præfigurata, hic manifesta. (Augustine: _Quæst._ xxxiii., in Num. § 1. m. iii. p. 541.)--In Veteri Testamento est occultatio Novi: in Novo Testamento est manifestatio Veteris. (_Id. De Catechiz. Rudibus_, § 8.--See also Quæst. lxxiii. in Exod.)

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

[179] Below, p. 108. The reader is requested to refer to the place.

[180] E.g. Gen. xi. 5-8: xviii. 17-21.

[181] E.g. Gen. vi. 6. 2 Sam. xi. 27.

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

[183] Rev. i. 10, 11.

[184] _Analogy_, P. II. ch. vii.

[185] Butler's _Analogy_, P. II. ch. vii.

[186] Heb. viii. 1.

[187] St. Luke iv. 21.

[188] St. John v. 46.

[189] St. Luke xxiv. 27.

[190] St. Luke xxiv. 44.

[191] Dr. Wordsworth (Occasional Sermon 54,) _On the Inspiration of the Old Testament_, (1859.)--p. 70.

[192] 2 Tim. ii. 2.

[193] See the middle of p. cxcvii.

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

[195] St. Luke xxiv. 27.

[196] St. John xiv. 26. The fulfilment of this promise repeatedly occurs: as in St. John ii. 17, 22: xii. 16: xiii. 7: St. Luke xxiv. 8. Consider St. John xx. 9.

[197] 1 Cor. xii., xiii., xiv., &c.

[198] St. Luke xxiv. 45.

[199] Acts ii. 4-21.

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

[201] Ps. xcii. 5.

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

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

[204] _Minor Works_, vol. ii. p. 10.

[205] _Ibid._ p. 6.

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

[207] See below, p. 142.

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

[209] The Creed of Lyons begins by describing itself as that which =hê men Ekklêsia, kaiper kath' holês tês oikoumenês heôs peratôn tês gês diesparmenê, para de tôn Apostolôn kai tôn ekeinôn mathêtôn paralabousa, k.t.l.= Most refreshing of all, however, are the concluding words of that Creed: so comfortable are they that I _cannot_ deny myself the consolation of transcribing them here, where indeed they are very much _ad rem_:--

=Touto to kêrygma pareilêphyia, kai tautên tên pistin, hôs proephamen, hê ekklêsia, kaiper en holô tô kosmô diesparmenê, epimelôs phylassei, hôs hena oikon oikousa· kai homoiôs pisteuei toutois, hôs mian psychên kai tên autên echousa kardian· kai symphônôs tauta kêryssei, kai didaskei, kai paradidôsin, hôs hen stoma kektêmenê. Kai gar hai kata ton kosmon dialektoi anomoiai, all' hê dynamis tês paradoseôs mia kai hê autê. Kai oute hai en Germaniais hidrymenai ekklêsiai allôs pepisteukasin, ê allôs paradidoasin, oute en tais Ibêriais, oute en Keltois, oute kata tas anatolas, oute en Aigyptô, oute en Libyê, oute hai kata mesa tou kosmou hidrymenai. All' hôsper ho hêlios, to ktisma tou Theou, en holô tô kosmô heis kai ho autos, houtô kai to kêrygma tês alêtheias pantachê phainei, kai phôtizei pantas anthrôpous tous boulomenous eis epignôsin alêtheias elthein. Kai oute ho pany dynatos en logô tôn en tais ekklêsiais proestôtôn hetera toutôn erei, (oudeis gar hyper ton didaskalon,) oute ho asthenês en tô logô elattôsei tên paradosin. Mias gar kai tês autês pisteôs ousês, oute ho poly peri autês dynamenos eipein epleonasen, oute ho to oligon êlattonêse.=--See Heurtley's _Harmonia Symbolica_, p. 9.

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

[211] =Kai honper tropon ho tou sinapeôs sporos, en mikrô kokkô, pollous periechei tous kladous, houtô kai hê Pistis hautê, en oligois rhêmasi, pasan tên en tê Palaia kai Kainê tês eusebeias gnôsin enkekolpistai.=--Cyril. Hieros. Cat. v. § 12,--quoted by Heurtley.

[212] _Answer._ He certainly does not employ _the identical language_ of the Nicene Council, or of the (so called) Athanasian Creed. But what then?

[213] _Ans._ Passages of the Epistles "distributed in alternate clauses between our Lord's Humanity and Divinity," begging Mr. Jowett's pardon, is nonsense. But _no_ passage in St. Paul's Epistles which relates to the Humanity, or to the Divinity of CHRIST, could be said to "lose its meaning" by being unlocked by its own proper clue: or, if the statement be complex, by being distributed under two heads.

[214] _Ans._ But not, I suppose, to _reconcile_ them? Why use inaccurate language on so solemn a subject?

[215] _Ans._ Doubtless we have to suppose this!

[216] _Ans._ Not so. For "there is one Person of the FATHER, and another of the SON."

[217] _Ans._ Doubtless we have to suppose this!

[218] _Ans_. But He did _not_ doubt!

[219] 1 St. John iv. 2, 3.--2 St. John ver. 7.

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

[221] E.g. "We should observe how the popular explanations of Prophecy, as in heathen (Thucyd. ii. 54,) so also in Christian times, had adapted themselves to the circumstances of mankind." (The Reverend writer can _never for a moment_ divest himself of his theory that Thucydides and the Bible stand on the same footing!) "We might remark that in our own country, and in the present generation especially, the interpretation of Scripture had assumed an apologetic character, as though making an effort to defend itself against some supposed inroad of Science and Criticism." (p. 340.) ... Just as if any other attitude was _possible_ when one has to do with 'Essayists and Reviewers!'

[222] One would imagine that the Essayist and his critic were entirely agreed. See below, p. 74,--"I refuse to accept any _theory_ whatsoever." And p. 115,--"_Theory_ I have none."

[223] Had the following passage occurred sooner to my recollection, it should have been sooner inserted:--"Are we to conduct the Interpretation of Holy Scripture as we would that of any other writing? We are and we are not. _So far_ as THE WORDS _are concerned, the mere words of Scripture_ have the same office with those of all language written or spoken in sincerity." They must be studied "by the same means and the same rules which would guide us to the meaning of any other work; by a knowledge of the languages in which the books were written, the Hebrew, the Chaldee, the Greek, and of those other languages, as the Syriac and Arabic, which may illustrate them; and of all the ordinary rules of Grammar and Criticism, and the peculiar information respecting times and circumstances, history and customs,--all the resources, in a word, of the Interpretation of any work of any kind. _The Grammatical and Historical interpretation of profane or sacred writings is the same_.... "All Scripture," meanwhile, "_is given by Inspiration of GOD_:" and this at once introduces several important differences; which whoever neglects may yet, with whatsoever advantages of learning and talent, fail to discover the real meaning of the Word of GOD."--From Dr. Hawkins (Provost of Oriel)'s _Inaugural Lecture_ as Dean Ireland's Professor, delivered in 1847,--pp. 29-30.

It is but fair to Mr. Jowett to add that, _in terms_, he has very nearly (not quite) said the self-same thing himself, at p. 337, (upper half the page.) But it is the peculiar method of this most slippery writer, or most illogical thinker, occasionally to grant almost all that heart can desire, as far as _words_ go; but straightway to deny, or evacuate, or explain away, _the thing_ which those words ought to signify.--Thus, at p. 337, he volunteers the remark that "No one who has a Christian feeling would place Classical on a level with Sacred Literature;" and at p. 377, he observes that, "There are many respects in which Scripture is unlike any other book." And yet, (as I have shown, p. cxliii. to p. cl.,) Mr. Jowett _puts_ the Bible on a level with Sophocles and Plato; and argues throughout as if Scripture were in _no_ essential respect unlike any other book!

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

[225] _Quarterly Review_, No. 217, p. 298.

[226] _Quarterly Review_, No. 217, pp. 265-6.

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

[228] St. Luke ii. 41.

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

[230] _Essays and Reviews_, p. 109.

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

[232] _Edinburgh Review_, (April, 1861,) p. 476.

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

[234] _Quarterly Review_, No. 217, p. 266.

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

[236] _Quarterly Review_, as before, p. 282.

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

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

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

[240] pp. cxciv.-v.

[241] See pp. 57 and 170.

[242] _Some Remarks, &c._, pp. xxiii.-xxv.

$Seven Sermons.$

SUBJECTS OF THE SERMONS.

(_For a detailed account of the Contents of these Sermons,
the Reader is referred to the beginning of the Volume._)

I.--THE STUDY OF THE BIBLE RECOMMENDED; AND A METHOD OF
STUDYING IT DESCRIBED p. 1

II.--NATURAL SCIENCE AND THEOLOGICAL SCIENCE p. 23

III.--INSPIRATION OF SCRIPTURE.--GOSPEL DIFFICULTIES.--THE
WORD OF GOD INFALLIBLE.--OTHER SCIENCES SUBORDINATE TO
THEOLOGICAL SCIENCE p. 53

IV.--THE PLENARY INSPIRATION OF EVERY PART OF THE BIBLE,
VINDICATED AND EXPLAINED.--NATURE OF INSPIRATION.--THE TEXT
OF SCRIPTURE p. 91

V.--INTERPRETATION OF HOLY SCRIPTURE.--INSPIRED
INTERPRETATION.--THE BIBLE IS NOT TO BE INTERPRETED LIKE ANY
OTHER BOOK.--GOD, (NOT MAN,) THE REAL AUTHOR OF THE BIBLE p. 139

VI.--THE DOCTRINE OF ARBITRARY SCRIPTURAL ACCOMMODATION
CONSIDERED p. 183

VII.--THE MARVELS OF HOLY SCRIPTURE, MORAL AND
PHYSICAL.--JAEL'S DEED DEFENDED.--MIRACLES VINDICATED p. 221

* * * * *

PRÆVENERUNT OCULI MEI AD TE DILUCULO, UT MEDITARER ELOQUIA TUA.

QUAM DULCIA FAUCIBUS MEIS ELOQUIA TUA: SUPER MEL ORI MEO.

LUCERNA PEDIBUS MEIS VERBUM TUUM, ET LUMEN SEMITIS MEIS.

=Ô KALÔS POIEITE PROSECHONTES, ÔS LYCHNÔ PHAINONTI EN AUCHMÊRÔ TOPÔ, EÔS OY ÊMERA DIAUGASÊ, KAI PHÔSPHOROS ANATEILÊ EN TAIS KARDIAIS UMÔN.=

DOMINE DEUS meus, ... sint castæ deliciæ meæ Scripturæ Tuæ. Nec fallar in eis, nec fallam ex eis.--AUGUSTINUS, _Confessiones_, lib. xi. c. ii. § 3.

The Book of this Law we are neither able nor worthy to look into. That little thereof which we darkly apprehend we admire: the rest with religious ignorance we humbly and meekly adore.--HOOKER, _Eccl. Pol._, B. I. ch. ii. § 5.

* * * * *

SERMON I.[243]

* * * * *

THE STUDY OF THE BIBLE RECOMMENDED; AND A METHOD OF STUDYING IT DESCRIBED.

* * * * *

ST. JOHN vi. 68.

_LORD, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of Eternal Life._

It was probably in that synagogue which the faithful Centurion built at Capernaum[244] that our SAVIOUR had been discoursing. At the end of His discourse, it is related that "many of His Disciples went back, and walked no more with Him." Thereupon, He asked the Twelve, "Will ye also go away?" the very form of His inquiry (=Mê kai hymeis=) implying the answer which the Divine Speaker expected and desired. And to this challenge of Love to Faith, St. Peter replied, not only on behalf of his fellow-Apostles, but on behalf of all faithful men to the end of time:--"LORD, to _whom_ shall we go? _Thou_ hast the words of Eternal Life!"

You perceive that St. Peter's confession takes a peculiar form,--resting the impossibility of unfaithfulness in the Apostles on the gracious discourse of Him to whom they had been listening. "A hard saying," and unpalatable, it had proved to many; but to his own taste it had seemed "sweeter than honey and the honeycomb." So that while, to those others, it had been an occasion of going back, and walking with CHRIST no more,--to himself it had been a reason why he could never, as he felt, be persuaded to forsake CHRIST. Nay, it was to himself, (and, as he boldly assumed, to his fellow-Apostles,) a sufficient evidence that the Speaker was none other than the SON of GOD. "And we believe, and are sure, that Thou art the CHRIST, the SON of the living GOD!"

Here then, surely, a very solemn picture is set before us. The same message proves, in the case of some, the savour of death unto death: in the case of others, of life unto life. It is an image of what is still taking place in the world. The Gospel, whether veiled in the Old Testament, or unveiled in the New, is confessedly "a hard saying:"--to some, their very crown and joy; to others, only an occasion of distress and downfall. It was so, when proclaimed not by the tongue of men and of angels, but by the lips "full of grace and truth" of the Incarnate WORD Himself: and it is so still. The temper of mankind is still the same as it was of old, and the instrument of man's trial is still the same.

Of the written Gospel, many of the self-same things are said in Scripture which are said of Him by whom that Gospel was preached. Thus, it is proclaimed to be "the power of GOD to salvation[245]." It is described as "a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart[246]." It is declared to be eternal,--a thing which "shall never pass away[247]." "In the last day," it is prophesied that the words which CHRIST has spoken "shall judge" men[248]. The very Name by which St. John designates the Eternal SON, in the forefront of his Gospel[249], is the appellation by which the Gospel is emphatically known.--But even more remarkable are the analogies which subsist between the written record of our LORD'S Life and Teaching, and the actual person of our LORD. And proposing, as I now do, to say a few earnest words to the younger men in recommendation of a more punctual, methodical, as well as attentive study of the Bible, than, I am persuaded, is practised by one young man in a thousand,--it may not prove unavailing in awakening attention, if I advert, in passing, to some of the circumstances whereby an even balance, (so to speak,) is established between the opportunities of the men of this generation, and of those who were blessed with the oral teaching of the Son of Man.

1. Thus, if the record has its difficulties, and its seeming contradictions, so had _He_. It did not appear that "JESUS _of Nazareth_" was born, (according to the prophet Micah's prediction,) at _Bethlehem_[250]. His title perplexed even Nathanael[251].--He was called the son of _Joseph_, even _by the Blessed Virgin[252]_. How then could He be the SON of GOD? And how was the famous prophecy of Isaiah fulfilled in Him[253]?--He grew up in a lowly estate. Once He is called "the carpenter[254]." How then could He be of the Royal House of David? And so, in many other respects, did He, in His own person, present the self-same class of difficulties to the world's eye which His Gospel presents to ours:--"the sixteenth of Tiberius,"--the two genealogies,--"Cyrenius,"--"the days of Abiathar,"--"Jeremy the prophet,"--and so on.

2. Somewhat less obvious, but not less true, is the unattractive aspect, at first sight, of the Gospel. Verily there is, until we become intimately acquainted with it, "no beauty that we should desire" it.--The style, (full of interest, to those who have tried to understand it a little,) is not, I suppose, what critics would call altogether a good style.--The Greek is not what learned men call _pure_.--Many a word, (brimfull of meaning to those who will give to the words of the Gospel their best care,) reminds one, that neither did _He_ speak what, in the capital of Jewry, was accounted a classical idiom. He employed the accent of the despised Galilee.--The very reasoning, (until you give it your heart's homage and best attention,) often seems to be either inconsequential, or to contain a fallacy. Certain words of our LORD have been even _cited_ as fallacious by a celebrated Divine whose writings we are all familiar with[255]. Now, _His_ words were disregarded, cavilled at, made light of, in just the same manner.

3. Most surprising of all is the analogy observable between the union of the Divine and the human element in the Gospels,--and the strictly parallel union, as it seems, of the two natures, the Divine and the Human, in the person of our LORD.--As _He_ was perfect and faultless, so do we deem _it_ infallible also, without spot or blemish of any kind. We reject as monstrous any 'theory of Inspiration,' (as it is called,) which imputes blunders to the work of the HOLY GHOST.--As, further, we claim for our LORD'S recorded human actions mysterious significancy, so do we seem warranted in looking for a mysterious purpose, a divine meaning, in every expression of the written Word.--Lastly, although we may, nay we must, admit such a Divine and such a human element, we must altogether deny the possibility of separating the one from the other. We cannot separate Scripture into human and Divine. Like the Incarnate WORD, the Gospel is at once both human _and_ Divine, yet one and indivisible. And the method of its inspiration is as great a difficulty in its way, and as much beyond our ken, as the nature of the union of the Godhead and the Manhood in the one person of CHRIST.

For whatever reason, and whether you please to accept the foregoing remarks or not, it is a plain fact that the Gospel is now in the world, fulfilling the same office towards mankind, which our Saviour CHRIST Himself fulfilled, and experiencing the same treatment at the hands of men in return. It is leavening society indeed, and remodelling the world, even while it is practically overlooked by politicians or experiencing evil treatment from them. It wins its way silently and secretly, yet surely; and it works miracles here and there. Moreover, it divides opinion; separating, as it will for ever separate, the light from the darkness[256]. It is slighted, and overlooked, and neglected by some; even while, by others, it is embraced with joy unspeakable. 'The humble and meek' adore it; even while, by the proud and rebellious, it is after a most strange fashion cavilled at, called in question, and denied. We specify _the Gospel_, instinctively, as that part of the Inspired Word which chiefly concerns ourselves, as Christian men; but the entire deposit shares the same fate. I do not think I am delivering a paradox when I say that the Bible is generally very little read. That the amount of _study_ commonly bestowed upon it bears no proportion whatever to its transcendent importance and paramount value, shall not be any paradox at all; but a mere truism.

For I entreat you to consider, (trite and obvious as it may sound,) _What_ have we, in the whole wide world, which may be put in competition with that Book which contains GOD'S revelation of Himself to man? In its early portions, how does it go back to the very birthday of Time, and discourse of things which were done in the grey of that early morning! How mysterious is the record,--so methodical, so particular, so unique; preserving the very words which were syllabled in Paradise, and describing transactions which no one but the HOLY GHOST is competent to declare! Come lower down, and _where_ will you find more beautiful narratives,--still fresh at the end of three and four thousand years,--than those stories of Patriarchs, Judges, Kings, which wrap up divinest teaching in all their ordinary details: where every word is weighed in a heavenly balance, fraught with a divine purpose, and intended for some glorious issue: where the very characters are adumbrations of personages far greater than themselves; and where the course of events is made to preach to us, at this distant day, of the things which concern our peace! Is it a light thing again to know in what terms Isaiah, and the rest of "the goodly fellowship," when they opened their lips to speak in that remote age, foretold of the coming of the Son of Man?... But all seems to grow pale before the Everlasting Gospel, and the other writings of the New Testament. Surely we have become too familiar with the providence which has preserved to us the very words of the four Evangelists, if we can bend our thoughts in the direction of the Gospel without a throb of joy and wonder not to be described, at having so great a treasure placed within our easy reach. Can it indeed be, that I may listen while the disciple whom JESUS loved is discoursing of the miracles, and recalling the sayings of his LORD? May I hear St. Peter himself address the early Church,--or know the precise words of the message which St. Jude sent to the first believers,--or be shown the Epistle which the LORD'S cousin addressed "to the Twelve Tribes scattered abroad"? How does it happen that the Book is not for ever in our hands which comes to us with such claims to our undivided homage?

But, on the contrary, it has become the fashion in certain quarters, on every imaginable pretext, to call in question the credibility of the Bible. It seems to be the taste of the age to invent hazy difficulties and dim objections to its statements. Inspiration, under a miserable attempt to explain it, is openly explained away. And the theory, however crude and preposterous, is tolerated: at least it escapes castigation. It cannot fail but that the unlearned and thoughtless ones of this generation will be growing up in a notion that these are open questions after all, and that "Truth" is but a name,--not a thing worth contending, aye _dying_ for, if need be! The reason is but too obvious. It must be, partly, because we do not in reality prize the deposit nearly so much as we suppose. Partly, because of the indifferentism which is everywhere so prevalent. Partly too because, notwithstanding our intellectual activity, we are not a really learned body. And partly, it must be confessed, the reason is, because Theology has become so nearly a prostrate study with us, and because men really able to do battle for the Truth are somewhat hard to find. Nor is there any reasonable prospect of improvement either; for those who go forth from this place into the Ministry, go with such slender preparation, that it would be truer to say that they go with none at all.

Now, it would be a mere waste of time, to inveigh for half an hour against the indifferentism, or the spurious liberality, of the age: and it would be a most unbecoming proceeding, (not to say a highly distasteful one,) from this place to be suggesting remedies for an evil which already lies very near the heart of every serious man among us; and which, if discussed at all, must be discussed elsewhere. To say the truth, while the neglect of Theology, and the low ebb of Theological attainments in our Clergy, is generally recognized, the remedy for the evil is by no means so clear. From this subject, then, I pass at once: and I shall content myself with the far humbler task, of urging upon the younger men present,--those especially who are destined for the Ministry,--one act of preparation, one duty, about which, at all events, there cannot be any difference of opinion: I mean the duty of applying themselves, _now_, to the patient study of the Bible.

The thing is soon said; but the hint requires expanding a little, in order that it may become of any practical use.--By the "study of the Bible," I do not mean a chapter occasionally read with care: nor even a chapter regularly conned over at night; when a convivial meeting has blunted the edge of observation, or severe study has exhausted the powers of the brain. The _devotional_ use of a portion of Holy Scripture is quite a distinct affair. Still less would the practice satisfy me of following the lessons in the College Chapel: and this for reasons so obvious that I will not stop to point them out. Nor even is the reading of the Bible in College Lecture, the thing I mean; for reasons also which any acute person will readily ascertain for himself. None of these methods of acquainting yourselves with the contents of the Bible come up to the thing I contemplate, although each is good in its way; and of course I am not speaking in disparagement of any.

No. The thing I would so strenuously urge upon you, is,--that, during your undergraduate period, you should read the whole Bible consecutively through, from one end to the other, _by_ yourself and _for_ yourself, with consummate method, care, and attention. The fundamental conditions of such a study of the Bible, in order to make it of any real use, are these:--

1. First, that you should deliberately apportion to this solemn duty the best and freshest and quietest half-hour in the whole day; and then, that you should determine, let what will go undone, never to abridge _that_ half-hour. You may sometimes be enabled to afford a little _more_ time to the chapter: but you will find it quite fatal ever to devote a shorter period to it. And half an hour, if you employ it in right good earnest, at present, must be thought enough.

2. Next, (except on Sundays and in Vacation, when you may safely double your daily task and your daily time,) be persuaded to read each day exactly one chapter. On no account attempt to go reading on; but rather spend the moments which remain over, (they _cannot_ be many!) in reviewing that day's portion; or referring to some of the places indicated in the margin; or glancing over yesterday's chapter.

The effect of building up your Bible knowledge in this manner, bit by bit, is what you would not anticipate. The whole acquires a solidity and compactness not to be attained by any other method. You will find at the end of many days, not only that the structure has attained to symmetry and beauty,--but that the disposition of its several parts, in some respects, has become intelligible also: while, (what is not of least importance,) the foundation on which all the superstructure rests, proves wondrous secure and strong.

3. Then, while you read,--safe from the risk of interruption, (as I began by supposing,) and with every faculty intent on your task,--try, as much as possible, to go over the words as if they were new to you; and watch them, one by one, so that nothing may by any possibility escape your notice. Do not slumber over a single word. Nothing can be unimportant when it is the HOLY GHOST who speaketh. It is an excellent practice to mark the expressions which strike you; for it is a method of preserving the memory of what is sure else soon to pass away.

4. And next, be persuaded to read without extraneous helps of any kind; except, of course, such help as a map, or the margin of your Bible, supplies. Pray avoid Commentaries and notes. First, you cannot afford time for them: and secondly, if you could, they would be as likely to mislead you as not. But the real reason why you are so strenuously advised to avoid them, is, because they will do more to nullify your reading, than anything which could be imagined. Your object is to obtain an insight into Holy Scripture, by acquiring the habit of reading it with intelligence and care: _not_ to be saved trouble, and to be shown what _other persons_ have thought about it.