Imagens das páginas

These are the arguments on which the advocates of the Bill rest their cause. Are they sufficient to induce the members of the Church of England to condemn their own Church by supporting that Bill? The Bill is, we repeat it again and again, A CENSURE ON THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. It is a Bill to establish the truth of the Roman Catholic view of the question in opposition to that of the Church of England-to that of Cranmer, Jewell, and the Reformers of the Convocations in the reign of Henry VIII., Elizabeth, James I.-of the authors of the Reformatio Legum in the time of Edward VI.—of all theologians and casuists of our Church from the time of Henry VIII. to the present day.

The Report of the Commissioners on the Marriage Laws has been ably dissected by Mr. Beresford Hope, who has shown its excessive partiality and one-sidedness, and has left it without a fragment of authority. The voice of the Church is, we may say, all but unanimous on the subject, as is proved by the number of publications which are appearing, and the petitions which are pouring into Parliament. It is, we conceive, absolutely impossible, that so unjustifiable a measure, one so injurious to public morality in all its tendencies, one so insulting to the Church of England, and one so destructive of the character, the peace, the influence of that Church, can pass through the legislature. We would infinitely sooner have seen Mr. Trelawny's motion for the abolition of the Church-rates carried, than this abominable Bill for legalizing incest, and making the Church of England give her sanction, directly or indirectly, to what she believes, and has repeatedly declared to be, "contrary to the Scriptures," and "prohibited by the law of God."

We say confidently, that the Church of England has not been convicted of error in her belief on this point; and therefore we hold it to be the duty of all her members to take every means in their power for defeating any attempt like that which is now being made. Let every deanery-let every parish, send in their petitions and their remonstrances against so great an outrage to their Church.



Thou shalt not bear false Witness against thy Neighbour." 2. The Name and Number of the Apocalyptic Beast. 3. Sertum Ecclesiæ. 4. Lays of the Scottish Cavaliers. 5. The Path of Life. 6. Loci Communes. 7. L'Anima Amante. 8. The Order of Confirmation. 9. The History of a Family. 10. Smith's Canadian Gazetteer. 11. Roman Forgeries and Falsifications. 12. The Four Gospels, with Annotations. 13. The Search after Infallibility. 14. Posthumous Works of Rev. Dr. Chalmers. 15. Epitome of Alison's History of Europe. 16. Outlines of English Literature. 17. The Trial of Creation: The Sea King. 18. The Haunted Man. 19. Nind's Lecture Sermons. 20. Liber Precum Publicarum. 21. Ramsay's Catechism for Young Persons. 22. Every Child's History of England. 23. Thoughts in Verse: The Triple Judgment. 24. Kings of England. 25. The Words from the Cross. 26. Brief Sketch of Human Nature in Innocency. 27. Journal in France in 1845 and 1848. 28. Sacred Latin Poetry. 29. The Inheritance of Evil. 30. Lectures on the Apocalypse. 31. The Acts of St. Mary Magdalene Considered. 32. Lectures on the Nature and Use of Money. 33. Godfrey Davenant at College. 34. Nelson's Companion for Fasts and Festivals. 35. Demoniacal Possession. 36. The Romaunt Version of St. John's Gospel. 37. Discourses on the Life of Christ. 38. Original Letters relative to the English Reformation: The Zurich Letters. 39. Life and Times of King Alfred the Great. 40. Poetry, Past and Present. 41. Woodward's Thoughts on the Character and History of Nehemiah. 42. Marsh's Christian Doctrine of Sanctification Considered. 43. The Scottish New Generation. 44. Woman; the Help Meet for Man. 45. The Life of Christians during the First Three Centuries of the Church. 46. Friends and Fortune. 47. Pinacothecæ Historica Specimen. 48. Correspondence between the Duke of Argyll and the Right Rev. W. J. Trower. 49. Stray Suggestions on Colonization.

I.-"Thou shalt not bear false Witness against thy Neighbour:" A Letter to the Editor of the English Review. From JULIUS CHARLES HARE, M.A., Archdeacon of Lewes. With a Letter from Mr. Maurice to the Author. London: J. W. Parker.

WE have perused this publication with considerable attention. It will be remembered that in our last number notice was drawn to certain tendencies in the present day towards the subversion of faith; and in connexion with, and exemplification of the dangers we were referring to, we were obliged to quote pretty copiously from a work which the Author of this Letter had recently edited, and to comment with severity on the sentiments advanced in that work, and on its editor. The pamphlet before us professes to be a reply to our strictures.

It is a most painful part of the reviewer's duty to point out offences against Christianity on the part of those who are its appointed teachers; but it becomes indispensably necessary to do so, when we conceive that the foundations of all Christian belief are, even unconsciously, shaken by writers whose names carry any weight with the public. The merits which a writer may pos

sess in other respects, his correctness of view on this or that matter of detail, on this or that particular Christian doctrine, is not to protect him from just and severe criticism, when his principles or teaching leads directly or indirectly to the subversion of the Christian faith.

Of course, when persons holding office in a Christian Church render themselves liable to such strictures as we have felt it a matter of duty to make on Sterling's Remains and its editor, it cannot be a matter of surprise, that such persons, more especially if they have assumed the office of leaders of public opinion, should writhe under the castigation which they have received, and should endeavour to represent themselves as unjustly and cruelly treated. The publication before us exhibits, accordingly, very slight traces of the philosophical temper. Its author is evidently at least no follower of the Stoic philosophy. Its tone of impassioned declamation would be almost comic were it on less grave topics. As a vocabulary of invective, it is really curious. We must frankly and unreservedly concede to the author the possession of very considerable attainments in this respect, as in so many others.

[ocr errors]

But, seriously speaking, how is the subject matter of our remarks affected by comparing us to "Iago," or to the "father of lies;" or speaking of our article as "shuffling," "malignant," "false," "mean," "insolent," "cribbed and cabined by party spirit;" or by asking how we "dare" to speak as we have done? The imputation of ignorance (without any proof of the correctness of the imputation) and of personal enmity in our criticisms, was a matter of course. The former is Mr. Hare's usual mode of dealing with those who hold different opinions from himself; and the latter is so common an artifice to distract attention, and to create feelings of sympathy, that we cannot in the least wonder at the author's resort to these expedients. We have no personal enmity whatever against any one of the writers referred to in our article; but we have read some of their productions with alarm and indignation at their principles and aims, and not without surprise at their arrogance and intolerance; and we shall not hesitate to direct attention to them whenever we deem it needful.

With these explanatory remarks, we shall put aside the personalities of the pamphlet, and proceed to consider its bearing on the grave and important subject of our article.

As far as we have been enabled to see, the publication before us substantiates the correctness of our statements in all material points, and proves that we were no mere alarmists in calling attention to what we conceived to be the dangerous character of Sterling's works, and to the conduct of Archdeacon Hare as editor of those works. It appears from this pamphlet, that Mr.

Hare was himself fully aware of the scandal which was likely to result from his publication. He tells us that he "did not undertake it without counting the cost, nor without much hesitation and reluctance ;" and that "no other work he ever engaged in, caused him a hundredth part of the painful anxiety." He dreaded, lest he should be the instrument of holding up Sterling "to severe reproach and condemnation;" lest "the vultures or other obscene birds that infest our Religious Journals," should "mangle" his Remains. And, though last, not least, "he could not but foresee the likelihood that he himself might incur blame, and might give offence to many pious persons, which his office rendered it a special obligation to avoid." At the close of the pamphlet, too, we learn that these anticipations have been, unfortunately for its author, realized. He would have left our remarks unrefuted, "if they had stood alone;" "but there was a good deal of censure on my conduct in publishing the Life of my friend, Sterling; and being aware that divers good persons, not knowing the circumstances which led me to undertake that work, have been grieved by my having done so, I deemed it right to make the foregoing statement, which I alone could make," &c.

The whole of this proves distinctly, that the publication of Sterling's Remains was no mere act of thoughtless or blind partiality to a friend, which might have afforded some feeble excuse for the course adopted by the editor; but that he distinctly foresaw the scandal which the publication of rationalistic sentiments under his auspices would cause; and we must therefore say, that if Mr. Hare has been involved in a position of a very disagreeable kind, in consequence of his own deliberate act, he has no one but himself to blame. We know, of course, that this consciousness is not calculated to put a man in the best humour with himself or with others, and therefore we can make considerable allowance for the very angry and abusive tone of the pamphlet before us.

But let us revert for a moment to the reasons which this writer assigns for undertaking to usher into public the infidel opinions of his friend, with the certainty of "giving offence to many pious persons." He was of opinion that the Life of Sterling might be so represented, as to be a useful lesson and warning to "the many young men of our age" who are "entangled in similar difficulties.' But this alone would not, it seems, have determined him to encounter the dangers which he foresaw. At length, however, as he tells us," the power of choice was scarcely left to me. For the alternative presented to me was, that I should execute the work, or else that it would be executed by another."

Now on this excuse, we must be permitted to offer a few

[ocr errors]

remarks, because it appears to us to involve a most unsound and mischievous principle. That principle is, that if a work, in itself exceptionable and dangerous, is likely to be executed by the enemies of Religion, the friends of Religion must anticipate them, by undertaking it themselves, and making the best they can of it. If, for instance, men suppose that German Infidelity is likely to gain attention—that there is a craving in some minds for such unwholesome diet, we are to lay ourselves out to gratify that longing as far as possible, by exhorting every one to study German theology, and by directing particular attention to those authors who are less unsound than others. We are to translate and to applaud works in which the most grave errors exist, because they are less unchristian than other works. We are to lay poison before the public with an antidote (which we cannot compel them to take); because others may perhaps lay it before them without an antidote. We are to give the weight of our stations and names to the dissemination of bad principles, because others may put forward worse, if we do not do so. Now we admit that this mode of proceeding is strictly accordant with the tortuous, vacillating, unprincipled policy of this world. recognise it as a form of that wretched spirit of the Age, which regards all firmness and stability of principle as bigotry, and which, without any fixed principle of its own, is willing to make concessions to an aggressive principle of error, under the pretence, or in the hope of propitiating a foe which cannot be propitiated. Weak men, or interested men, seek to gain popular applause by sailing with the current of the times wherever it is setting; and they delude themselves in the vain hope that they can guide the torrent; whereas they are only adding their own momentum, whatever it may be, to its forces. Evil principles have gained a great advantage, when they have formed any kind of alliances with names of respectability. It adds tenfold to their power and their mischief. We have seen many fearful exemplifications of the truth of this.


Mr. Hare is a decided advocate of this false principle: it runs through the whole of his defence of those who are endeavouring to promote the study of infidel and heretical writings in England. But on this point we shall speak hereafter.

He justifies on this ground, as we have seen, his publication of the Life and Remains of Sterling. But he goes on to add, as another motive, that "if such a monument was to be erected to Sterling," he was the person whom Sterling could have "wisht 1" to erect it. We confess that we cannot see the weight of any such argument, when it is remembered that the real question was,

1 We copy Mr. Hare's affected mode of spelling.

« AnteriorContinuar »