556 Note H. On Two Criticisms of this Work. man' at the same time, but unintentionally, misrepresents the attitude of the Bampton Lecturer towards Church authority. If the Lecturer had learnt from the Church of England that 'Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation m,' he had also learnt from her that the Church hath authority in controversies of faith n'; and, in view of the real history of the formation of the Canon of the New Testament, the last proposition is at least as reasonable and as certain as the first. To accept the Church's guidance in recognising the contents and the authoritative character of the Canon of Scripture, and then to refuse her any voice whatever in its interpretation, seems to the present writer impossible; and if he has, in his Lectures, appealed to the natural force of Scripture language, this has not been in any spirit of fancied independence of Church authority, but because he sincerely believes that there is no real antithesis between the judgments of that authority in ages when it was still unimpaired by division, and an honest criticism of the Sacred Text. The function of Church authority, as it was understood by such writers as St. Irenæus, was not to add new doctrine to the Apostolic deposit, as the 'Clergyman' apparently supposes, but to shew what the Apostolic deposit really does contain; to take mankind, as it were, by the hand when exploring the vast field of Scripture; to call attention to expressions, or occurrences, or lines of thought which might otherwise escape observation; and thus to furnish the reader, not with additional material, but with a true point of view, and a sympathetic intellectual and moral temper, for discovering those profound unities and truths for the sake of which alone the Church sets value on Scripture at all. The Christian Revelation was in fact committed, not only to the pages of a Sacred Book, but to the guardianship of a Sacred Society; and the second factor can just as little be dispensed with as the first. If the Church may not contradict or exceed the teaching of the Book, the true authority and import of the Book cannot be long upheld apart from that illuminated consciousness of the Church, which originally recognised it as being the Word of God. This consideration will perhaps explain a feature of the Lectures on which the 'Clergyman' has felt it to be his duty to comment, again and again, with much severity. The Lecturer has called attention very deliberately, not only to the great dogmatic passages in which Our Lord's Divinity is expressly Note H. On Two Criticisms of this Work. 557 taught, but to that much larger number of passages or even paragraphs in which it is so far implied that, while of themselves they do not prove the doctrine, they look, so to speak, towards it, and are read most naturally, if we assume that it is true. The Clergyman' often discusses the reference made to such passages in the Lectures, as if the Lecturer had appealed to them as dicta probantia, and had thus put a strain on them which, obviously, they cannot bear. Their real place in the argument is supplemental and subsidiary; and if they were not accompanied or rather introduced by explicit statements of another character, they could not be appealed to at all. But, as the Lecturer conceives, their cumulative force is very great, and as the 'Clergyman' truly observes, the Lecturer cannot be charged with originating the use o' which he has made of them. He has learnt this 'use' from the authority to which alone he owes it that he receives the Bible as the Word of God, in any serious sense, at all; while reflection has not brought with it any distrust either of his teacher or her lessons. g 6 At the same time the writer must not shrink from professing his conviction that, if there were no Church at all to guide him, the natural sense of such passages as Rom. ix. 5, or of Col. i. 15-17, or of St. John i. 1-14, is that our Lord Jesus Christ is of one Substance with the Father, Very and Eternal God. If the 'Clergyman' would consider Philippi's P commentary on the first of these passages, or Bishop Lightfoot's a on the second, or Professor Westcott's on the third, he would perhaps feel that there is more to be said in favour of this conclusion than he has hitherto been able to admit. But, in the absence of faith in the trustworthiness of Scripture, no critical insight into the real scope of its language would be of much service. According to the Clergyman,' the 'really Scriptural position' is, 'that Christ fills, in the scale of being, a place not perfectly defined, but certainly above man, and as certainly beneath God.' This, as he elsewhere says, is the Arian Creed; and it is open, as has been urged in these Lectures, to the grave objection that it could not have been held by serious Monotheists, such as were the Apostles of our Lord. But in a note the 'Clergyman' explains that the formula above cited is only tenable 'if every statement • Examination, p. 44. 4 Epistle to the Colossians in loc. P Comment, on the Romans in loc. Gospel of St. John (Speaker's Commentary), in loc. 558 Note H. On Two Criticisms of this Work. of Scripture is accepted in its natural rational meaning with unquestioning acquiescence.' He adds 'The Christ of an uncritical Biblical Protestantism is an Arian, superhuman Christ. The Christ of a critical Protestantism is a merely human, but extraordinarily endowed Christt.' It is difficult to see why he should, upon the 'Clergyman's' principles, be even as much as this: but the avowal shews that, even after the sense of Scripture has been minimized by negative criticisms to a point which is fatal to all that is most precious in the Christian Creed, the little that remains is after all peremptorily rejected, and we are left with an estimate of the Divine Saviour of the world which might have been gathered not less readily from the Koran than from the New Testament. Enough, perhaps, has been said to shew that the Lecturer has carefully considered what his critics have had to say about him. He has indeed read them through attentively. And if he does not farther accompany them, they will believe that this is not from any disrespect, but partly because a large book would be needed in order to discuss some far-reaching questions which they severally raise, and partly because, as has been already suggested, a large proportion of his differences with them in detail are due to earlier and deeper differences of principle. But there are some matters of detail which he has been led to reconsider in the light of their criticisms, and it is a pleasure to express his obligation to both of them, but especially to the 'Clergyman,' for corrections which his book thus owes to them, in its present form. Examination, p. 248, note. INDEX. The numerals refer to the Lectures, the figures to the pages. A. Abraham, promise to, ii. 46; Divine Adam, the first and the Second, vi. Adoration, distinguished from 'ad- Eons, v. 223; vi. 312, 320; vii. Agnoetæ, heresy of, viii. 470. Alford, Dean, v. 239, 240; vi. 291, Ambrose, St., as a commentator, ii. Ananias, prayer of, to Christ, vii. 377. 'Angel of the Lord,' the, ii. 53 sq. Antichrist, the token of, i. 23; v. Anti-dogmatic moralists, 1. 37. V. 220. Apollinarianism, i. 25; v. 264; viii. Apollinaris of Hierapolis, v. 215. Apotheosis, among Romans, no pa- Arnobius, on Christ's Divinity, vii. 424. Artemon, his allegation as to doc- trine of Christ's Divinity, vii. 434. Athanasius, St., his analysis of Ari- Athenagoras, on the Logos, v. 231; vii. 421; on the 'Generation,' 427. on Christ's Divinity, vii. 480 sq. i. 33; on Theophanies, ii. 57; on B. Balaam, prophecy of, ii. 80. Basil, St.; viii. 427. Basilides, cognizant of St. John's Baur, admissions of, i. 27; iv. 176; Blandrata, vii. 413. Boethius, on 'Person,' i. 33. Bretschneider, his 'Probabilia,' v. 2II. Browne, Bishop Harold, on human Bruno Bauer, v. 229. Bushnell, on boldness of Christ's 'plan,' iii. 118, note. Butler, Bishop, on the moral obliga- i. 41. C. Cabbalism, vi. 284. Calvinism, Sacramental teaching of, Canticles, the Evangelical, their sig- Catechism, Church, Sacramental Celsus, as an opponent of Christi- |