Page images
PDF
EPUB

"A fugitive had asked and received protection at her hands; he was miserable, defeated, weary ;—he was the ally of her husband; he was her invited and honoured guest;-he was confiding, defenceless, and asleep; yet she broke her pledged faith, violated her solemn hospitality, and murdered a trustful and unprotected slumberer."

The error in all this is, that Mr. Farrar does not read the Scripture in its true light, as a narrative of God's deliverances, but as if Barak and Deborah and Jael were merely following out their own devices. But the defeat and death of Sisera is recorded for us as an act of God, and as a most righteous act. That Sisera was "confiding, defenceless, and weary" has nothing to do with the justice of God's sentence; and that Jael received him kindly and compassionately, while she really intended to kill him, is a rash conclusion of Mr. Farrar's, wholly unwarranted by the sacred record.

But, under the head of JABIN, we find Mr. Farrar introducing fresh doubts as to the whole story. He finds a Jabin, king of Hazor, in Joshua xi., and a Jabin, king of Hazor, in Judges iv., just as he finds Pharaohs in Egypt in Abraham's time, in Jacob's time, and in Moses's time. But he most rashly and perilously is "led to regard the two accounts" (in Joshua and in Judges) "as really applying to the same monarch and the same event." It is clear that this is to make utter confusion of the two narratives, and to render the two books quite useless and valueless as authentic history! Such is the natural result of Mr. Farrar's studies in the field of German criticism. We feel that there is more real danger in this unavowed infidelity, than even in the declared disbelief of Bunsen and F. W. Newman.

The same readiness to dislocate Scripture, and to treat it as a mere bundle of odd scraps and traditions, is shown by Mr. Farrar in many places. Thus, under the head GOLIATH, he thus writes:

"It is strange that we find no more definite allusions to this combat in Hebrew poetry; but it is the opinion of some, that the song now attributed to Hannah (1 Sam. ii. 1-10.) was originally written really in commemoration of David's triumph."

Mr. Farrar does not allude to this as an absurd or untenable notion; but gravely cites, as authorities for it, "Thenius, Bertholdt, and Ewald." Yet what does this opinion involve? It involves at least this, that the 1st of Samuel speaks falsely, when it puts into the mouth of Hannah a hymn which was not, in fact, written till more than a century after!

The last article to which we shall make particular reference is that of THE BOOK OF JASHER, which article is from the pen of "W. A. Wright, B.A., of Trin. Coll." Compared with the manner in which such a subject as HEAVEN is dismissed in two columns, we feel inclined to complain of the waste of four columus on so useless a topic as that of this lost book. But we soon find that the

writer's object is to give currency to a lengthened account, without a word of censure, of Dr. Donaldson's book, which occasioned his expulsion from the grammar school of Bury. That absurd and mischievous work is now dead and forgotten. What good end could possibly be answered by disinterring it, and giving its contents the publicity which must belong to this Dictionary? A hundred similar follies and monstrosities have been perpetrated by the German critics during the last half-century; what were the claims of Dr. Donaldson's trashy production to be singled out, and forced into notice by a lengthened account in this volume? The whole article is an offence against good taste and proper feeling.

After these specimens, the reader will not feel any surprise at being informed that Mr. Maurice's books are referred to in all parts of the volume as works of standard theology. We have met with these references continually in turning over the pages of the Dictionary; but we only noted down pages 139, 777, 873, 913, 1108, and 1114, as containing such references. On the whole, we must report that most of the leading contributors to the Dictionary appear to regard Mr. Maurice as a sound divine.

We have now, probably, given our readers a sufficient insight into the character of this important work. We regret that our approval of it must be so largely qualified. The volume, indeed, seems fairly to represent the present state of the church, as perplexed with "manifold temptations." But it necessarily fails to realize the idea of a trustworthy guide; inasmuch as a guide, to inspire any confidence, ought to show that he has a clear and definite knowledge of the road; whereas the general result of a perusal of this book is to distract, perplex, and confuse the reader's mind.

Dr. Smith may rely upon it that the book cannot succeed,cannot become an established favourite, in its present condition. We offer to his mind this consideration, from a doubt whether he is open to higher motives. If he were what an instructor in biblical literature ought to be, he would himself have detected the blemishes we have now pointed out, and would have saved his work from their occurrence. His plea, that "the editor, instead of endeavouring to obtain uniformity, has considered it an advantage to the reader to bave the arguments stated from different points of view"-is an insufficient and delusive one. So far as it gives an impression that the editor is not responsible,-that he has left all his contributors at full liberty, it leads to a belief which is not the truth. We happen to know that papers have been excluded or modified, because, in Dr. Smith's opinion, they" would be thought too heterodox." It follows, therefore, that in all the loose and perilous speculations which we have given above, there is nothing which appears to Dr. Smith to be beyond the boundary of allowable heterodoxy.

Scepticism, then, here appears in another form from that which it assumed in the Essays and Reviews. In that book doubt was cast upon everything; and the truth of the Bible, the prophecies of the Bible, the miracles of the Bible, and the way of salvation set forth in the Bible, were all openly assailed. But the deleterious draught was too strong; its character was too entirely unconcealed; and the public mind revolted at poison so presented to it. In the present case, the mischief is wrapped up and concealed with far greater care. A very important and exceedingly useful work is projected, and the assistance of several scholars of the highest rank is solicited and obtained. But with these are mingled some less trustworthy names; and these younger and less solid members of the confederacy are allowed to take more than their fair share of the labour. The result is a work of mingled character. Several papers of undoubted value help to give weight and importance to the book; but with these are intermingled a variety of rash and irreverent speculations, mostly borrowed from the German: the general result and practical tendency of which is, to throw everything into doubt and uncertainty.

A great and prevalent evil, however, is thus developed and brought into view. The mischievous parts of this book are chiefly those parts which are written by the younger men among the writers so associated. And these writers all trace their sceptical notions, unequivocally, to German sources. They cite, without hesitation or reluctance, the opinions of German critics, who are notorious deniers of the inspiration of Holy Scripture. And here lies the chief root of the evil.

More than twenty years ago, Mr. Palmer, of Worcester College, said, in his Treatise on the Church, that "Lutheranism and Calvinism, as religious systems, seem to have nearly perished in the countries where they arose." This language was strong; and the last few years have done much to diminish its truth. But, assuredly, a large proportion of the biblical criticism of Germany in modern times falls under the censure and caution of St. Paul :"Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ." (Col. ii. 8.) And we can feel no doubt that, of the great majority of the German critics, the only safe rule is that which the apostle gives concerning other defiling things: "Let them not be once named among you, as becometh saints." (Ephes. v. 3.)

Thomas Paine was a gross and foul-mouthed man, and he offended all persons of proper feeling by his open profanity. But, essentially, he was not more profane or irreligious than such men as Strauss, or Ewald, or De Wette; who, having a certain decent exterior to maintain as professors in Lutheran or Evangelical Universities, begin by declaring their great respect for the Scriptures, but proceed by gradually stripping them of all Divine

authority, and reducing them to a level with the poems of Homer, or the Puranas of the Hindoos. And, unquestionably, this phase of infidelity is by far the most perilous. For one infidel made by the Age of Reason, there have been scores, or perhaps hundreds, trained up by the professors of Biblical learning in Germany.

And hence we look with great jealousy upon the fashion which has latterly prevailed, and to which this Dictionary gives great countenance, of treating the critics of Germany with vast deference, as if no doubtful passage of Scripture could be deemed to be properly understood, until we had heard what the German critics thought of it. In most cases these critics are only capable of "darkening counsel by words without knowledge." The Bible is "the word of God." If any man rejects it in this character, and sets about the study of it in the firm resolve to treat it as the word of man, he reads it with darkened spectacles, and instead of being a valued and trusted guide, can be nothing else than a misleader. Yet are such writers constantly referred to in this volume, as if of paramount value and importance, in spite of their scepticism. Thus, of the book of JOB, we are told, that

"The best works of the present century are those of Rosenmüller, and of H. Ewald, whose translation and commentary are remarkable for accurate learning and originality of genius; but also for contempt of all who believe in the inspiration of Scripture. The commentaries of Umbreiht, Vaihinger, Lange, Stickel, Hahn, Hirzel, De Wette, Knobel, and Vatke, are generally characterized by diligence and ingenuity, but have, for the most part, a strong rationalistic tendency. Mr. Rénan has lately given an excellent translation in French, with an introduction, which, notwithstanding its thoroughly sceptical character, shows a genial appreciation of some characteristic excellences of this book."

On the awful subject of "JEHOVAH," the writer coolly says, at the foot of a paper of thirteen columns,

"The principal authorities which have been made use of in this article (besides those already quoted), are Hengstenberg, Reinke, Tholuck, Kurtz, Keil, Ewald, Gesenius, Bunsen, and Reland."

And these, so-called "authorities," are almost all German, and almost all avowed deniers of the inspiration of Scripture !

Of the book of DANIEL, we are informed, that

"The question of the authenticity of the book is discussed in most of the later commentaries, especially by Hengstenberg, Havernick, Delitsch, Keil, and Davidson, who maintain the affirmative; and by Bleek, Bertholdt, Lücke, and De Wette, who deny its authenticity."

And thus, throughout the whole book, the principle adopted and asserted seems to be, that the German critics, though rationalistic, irreverent, and often semi-infidel, are still to be regarded as our chief guides in the critical interpretation of Scripture. This principle we cannot for a moment admit. The true character and authority of the word of God is not an open question. It is not immaterial to

the true interpretation of these ancient writings. It ought to be decided, it must be decided,-before the student can rightly commence his inquiries as to the real meaning of this or that portion. If the whole book be indeed of no higher character than the writings of Homer, then the rule of interpretation must, of necessity, be a totally different one from that which ought to be adopted, if it be "given by inspiration of God."

66

To give a single instance. Do we know with certainty what our Lord said and did upon earth? and are we sure that He Himself was God over all, blessed for ever?" Then we shall read His words with awe and reverence, and with full submission of mind. But if we open the Gospels, regarding them merely as ancient legends, in which truth and error are mingled together, and read the words of Christ with doubt whether He ever spoke them, and with entire uncertainty as to His own character and authority,then with how little weight or force will either the hopes or the terrors of a future state fall upon our ears! The whole belongs to the region of poetry or uncertainty.

And hence we feel, that between the believing and the unbelieving commentator,-between him who accepts the book as the precious gift of God, and him who takes it up as a collection of ancient romances, there is a distinction as wide as between earth and heaven. And, with this view, it naturally revolts us, to find the Christian expositor and the sceptic commingled together, as we constantly find them in the pages of this Dictionary. It is to confound truth and falsehood-the servants of God, with the agents of Satan. And it is this error, chiefly, which has led the editor and contributors of this Dictionary into various evil courses; and which has made their work, with all its merits, one which will not satisfy or content the Christian people of England.

MR. MAURICE'S TWO SERMONS.

The Faith of the Liturgy and the Doctrine of the Thirty-Nine Articles. Two Sermons, the substance of which was preached at St. Peter's, Vere Street, on Sunday, September 9th, 1860. By the Rev. Frederick Denison Maurice, M.A. London: Macmillan and Co. 1860.

THESE two sermons were preached by Mr. Maurice on entering upon his new benefice, in Vere Street. He had to declare his assent to the book of Common Prayer, as well as the Thirty-nine Articles, and to read both in the face of the congregation. Desirous, he says, that this profession should not be an idle ceremony, and that he might comply with it effectually, these sermons

[blocks in formation]
« PreviousContinue »