CHAPTER II.

GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE MINISTERS OF ANY

DENOMINATION.

BUT next arises the question whether those, who deny the infallibility of Scripture, and yet acknowledge its inspiration and authority, can and should remain in the ministries of the several churches. It is quite impossible that we should argue out this question with reference to each individual community even of English Christians; but we shall perhaps do enough to meet the wishes of all readers if we offer two general considerations that apply to the ministers of all sects alike, and if we then lay down a few observations with special reference to that section of Christ's church with which we are ourselves connected, and which is by law established in this realm of England.

A. WE DO NOT DENY THE INSPIRATION OF THE BIBLE.

OUR first general observation is, that, so far from denying the Inspiration of the Bible, we strenuously assert that Inspiration; and our attempt is to vindicate for the term "Scriptural Inspiration" its real meaning, in order that we may both preserve the general historical credibility of Holy Writ and also raise the popular idea of Inspiration, away from its present untenable notion of infallibility, high above the conception which often confounds "divine inspiration" with "genius," if not with "cleverness.' Thus, then, if any minister feels himself constrained to agree with us that the Bible, though inspired and of great authority, is not infallible; and if he feels, also, that the formularies of his church, to which he has pledged his assent, either imply or assert the doctrine of the Bible's Inspiration, such a minister need be in no alarm. He has only, with prudence and fidelity, to teach a truer and

better doctrine of biblical inspiration than he before knew or dared to entertain, in the same manner as he is surely accustomed to teach every other doctrine better and more clearly in proportion as his own views of it are enlarged and corrected by reading and by reflection. This remark is, we think, sufficient to satisfy most cases; but, if there be any reader who, while he agrees with our view of Inspiration and Infallibility, is pained by a consciousness that the formularies of his church either explicitly declare or otherwise imply the infallibility of Scripture, in such a case our second general observation may be worthy of attention.

B.-JESUS WOULD NOT DISSENT, THOUGH HE DIffered.

It is a truth full, as we think, of importance, yet seldom, if ever, noticed, that although the Jews expunged from their synagogue one, at least, of Christ's disciples merely because he glorified the Lord, by whom his sight had been miraculously restored to him; and, although we are distinctly told that Jesus knew and noticed this excommunication, yet He never felt it necessary to sever himself or dissent from the established, but no longer divinely required, Judaism of his day; and yet, moreover, never, except in cases of the most stubborn obstinacy or the direst necessity, did the Apostles, as far as the Bible informs us, think it right to separate themselves and formally dissent from the Jewish church. In the good providence of God, the Jews never seem to have ventured on excommunicating Jesus, though they dared to kill him. To the last He taught publicly in the temple and in the synagogues. He knew well how widely his principles differed from those which had the sanction of the rulers in that church with which He worshipped, and in whose religious festivals He bore a part. He knew that his principles, which were questioned by the priests, had the authority of truth, whilst many of their principles and practices bore the stamp of error, not to say of guilt. Yet, as long as Judaism would bear him or his followers, it was his divine wish that neither they nor He should sever themselves from the community in which they had been born and educated. The conservative and the reforming elements were both strong in our Saviour's mind. He would have every society get rid of its faults and develop its ideal in new improvements; but He would have such amelioration to

proceed from within the society itself, of its own free choice and deliberate action. He would have every man work out his best and most reforming thoughts, but He would have the man continue in his calling, and so improve himself and his coadjutors. He looked on truth, to the knowledge of which a man is brought, as leaven put within that man by the Heavenly Father, that it might leaven first the man himself, then his immediate circle of acquaintance, and last, not least, the whole brotherhood of mankind. Thus it appears that our Lord's plan was to develop the true germs of Judaism into the perfection of Christianity, and, by the truth of Christianity, to enable Judaism to cast away its errors. He had no design to abolish one religion and set up another in its stead, but He would strengthen and elevate the one by the engrafting of the other. He had no desire to promote rivalry between the two systems which, since our Lord's day, have ranged themselves as antagonists under the several banners of Moses and of Jesus. Now, if Christ is to be our example and our teacher, should we not obey and imitate Him in this? Should we not, as ministers and teachers, be content to abide in our several high vocations as long as they who bear the rule will allow us? If they expel us for teaching what we conceive to be important truth, and what, therefore, we are bound not to suppress, let the responsibility of so tearing themselves away from some of the members of Christ's mystical body-the sin of such schism -let it rest with them and not with us.

On this ground, then, we would, on the one hand, urge every man to look well to it that he do not allow vanity, or eccentricity, or mere love of change, to seduce him into embracing-still less into promulgating-any new opinions which he has not solemnly and conscientiously examined, and which, if promulgated, would require the faithful rulers of his church to expel him; and, on the other hand, we would entreat no man lightly to sever himself from the ministry to which he has been called by the providence and grace of God, and in which he has power and opportunity to teach improving truth, and so to carry on a Christ-like reformation from within. Brother, we would say to such an one, let the rulers expel thee for thy manly avowal of truth if unhappily they will; but do thou remember Jesus and the Apostles, and do not expel thyself, and so, weakening thine own influence for good, increase the love-concealing multitudes of sectarianism.

SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS APPLYING TO THE CLERGY OF THE ESTABLISHED CHURCH OF ENGLAND.

IF from these general remarks we turn to the particular case of the Established Church in England, it may be asked what portion of the law, or of her formularies, is there which we transgress?

A. WE ARE NOT TOUCHED BY THE LAW AGAINST BLASPHEMY.

WE are aware that the English Statute Book still regards "blasphemy" as a punishable offence; but we are persuaded that not even they, who may most widely differ from the opinions we have expressed in these pages, can, with any regard for truth, charge us with having treated the Bible, or Christianity, or any sacred thing, lightly or irreverently. If, from general enactments, recourse be had to particular laws, we can suppose that the more or less bigoted character of the Act of Uniformity might bring it to the recollection of some who would like to repress this discussion by authority; but, here, as in all other quarters, we believe and hope that the persecuting wish will fail to find any legal sanction of its desires towards us.

B. THE ACT OF UNIFORMITY CONDEMNS US NOT.

Or the Act of Uniformity we may approve or disapprove. The assent and consent it requires-to what has been described as an Arminian Liturgy and a collection of Calvinistic Articles-we may think to be of a good or of an evil tendency on the morality and intelligence of our religious teachers. But, whatever be our opinions of this Statute, which comes to us from the tyrannical Stuarts, and which is still the chief test

of English orthodoxy, we have yet to learn that the Act of Uniformity requires we should hold the Bible to be infallible; or, indeed, that it requires us to hold any particular theory of Inspiration. It is to the Book of Common Prayer that this Act points, and for that book that it demands our unfeigned assent and consent to all the Calvinism, or Arminianism, or both, which any man may think is therein contained.

C.-IN THE BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER, NEITHER THE CREEDS, THE ORDINAL, THE LITURGY, NOR THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES ARE OPPOSED TO us.

WELL, then, let us turn to the Book of Common Prayer. What do its Creeds or Articles pledge us to on the subject of Biblical infallibility or inspiration? The Nicene Creed teaches us that the "Holy Ghost spake by the prophets." This we do not doubt, for we believe that the blessed Spirit, who is "the giver of life," speaks in every good word, and that He especially spoke by the mouths of the "goodly fellowship of "the prophets." The Articles assure us that the three Creeds are to be believed because "they may be proved by most "certain warrants of Holy Scripture"-["firmissimis Scrip"turarum testimoniis probari possunt."] To this, again, we heartily assent; for whatsoever we read in Scripture we are prepared to receive respectfully and judge reverently; whatsoever can be proved by any means, drawn from any source, we are ready to believe; and, above all, whatsoever can be proved by the most satisfactory evidence of the Scriptures, that we shall assuredly not be slow devoutly to believe.

As to what are the "most certain warrants of Holy Scrip"ture," the seventeenth Article does not fail to give us some very valuable information. By no means do its noticeable words tell us that every isolated verse is such a warrant; but, rather, the last paragraph of the seventeenth Article implies that some passages are so far from being infallible, that they might lead us astray if we did not limit their meaning, and so correct them by other and truer passages. This, we say, and no less than this, is implied and cannot fail to be understood by every careful and unprejudiced reader of the following words in this Article-"We must receive God's promises in