The Press.
London, England, 1855-05-26 00:00:00

THE PRESS

In conclusion, we will quote one short
sentence in which there is nothing cynical or
satirical. There is sympathising humanity
and flesh and blood feeling in this passage,
which certainly was penned by no moody
misanthrope :

What a hero a man is when in love ! I do not believe
there ever was a hero who was not in that happy state ; he
must have one among the multitudinous world in whom he
trusts wholly and solely—one whom he reveres—one to
whom he looks for praise—one above him, and yet he shall
not know why she is above him. Perhaps Mrs. Ellis can
explain this

Vindication of Luther against his Recent ling.
lish Assailants. Second Edition. By Julius
Charles Hare, M.A., Archdeacon of Lewes.
Loudon : J. W. Parker and Son.
IF it is necessary in the case of any of the
heroes of their day to estimate their characters
by the condition and spirit of their age, and
their conduct and opinions by the peculiarities
of their position and their task, surely the case
of Luther has beyond all others that necessity.
To dwell upon the strongly-marked, rough
attributes of the man, his courage, his temper,
and his style, without considering the work he
had to do, and to judge him by the standards
of the polemics of the present time, while he
was waging singlehanded a mighty war against
the inert mass of ignorance that weighed upon
Christendom, is to betray a total inability to
form a conception of the great Reformer.
Every principle of vitality in religion had dis-
appeared when Rome had succeeded in sweep-
ing away the keystone of the gospel justifica-
tion by faith—a doctrine the aversion to which,
or the neglect of which, Archdeacon Hare
justly remarks to be the unfailing characteris-
tic of a tendency towards Rome. Luther
found faith denied, and, instead even of their
boasted works, he found a seething sea of
iniquity—the whole Roman system in the
height of its wealth, and profligacy, and pride.
He had no materials on which to work. The
spark was to be aroused in the minds of the
population of Christian Europe, and before he
could implant the truth luxuriant growths of
error had to be swept away. It was his task
to cause a sunrise at midnight in such an age
and time.

Columbus of the mental deep !
Nor less a hero thou than be I
Who waked'st the earth from bigot sleep
As he unchained the sea!
For this mighty task Luther was armed with
an energy superhuman, an indomitable cou-
rage, and a human sympathy that embraced
every hope, and wish, and even failing, of his
kind.

Among many other painful marks of the
present age, one is, in certain quarters, the de-
preciation of Luther. Philosophical historians
of the see-saw order, who balance so exactly
their praise and blame that the reader runs
danger of dizziness, think him " more quoted
"than read," and his purity of life balanced
by his violence of controversy. Of such
writers and their " impartiality " Archdeacon
Hare happily says that " both heat and cold
" are better than Laodicean lukewarmness,"
and with still better effect that " mere nega-
" tiveness is a sorry qualification for forming
"an estimate of intellectual or moral grandeur."
But these writers are not content with this
equally•balanced impartiality. t Mr. Hallam,
the most popular, and therefore the most dan-
gerous, makes the charge of Antinomianism on
more than one occasion, and supports his cen-
sure by a reference to the " writings of Luther
" up to the year 1520, inclusive." To this the
archdeacon conclusively replies that those
whinge contain only three collections of
scholastic theses, and that for a quarter of a
century afterwards Luther poured forth
writings and sermons in an aUundance seldom
paralleled. There is, indeed, in Mr. Hallam's
admiration of Bossuet some marks to raise
suspicion that he was carried away by the ac-
count of the great Reformer given so eloquently
by the " eagle of Meaux," whose references
he at the same time admits he could not
verify. On a question of mere style it is diffi-
cult, and perhaps not important, to form an
opinion, but we think the following passage
from the work as happy in its description as it
is true in judgment :
Mr. Hallam, who here and elsewhere expresses such
fervent admiration for liossuet's eloquence, says of
Luther's Latin works, " their intemperance, their coarse-
ness, their inelegance, their scurrility, their wild paradoxes,
that menace the foundations of religious morality, are not
compensated, so far at least as my slight acquaintance
with them extends, by much strength or acuteness, and
still leas by any impressive eloquence." To me, 1 own, in

....4I as 3.‘" n'VV.S—.... ..... h `'''''"-'"'" uy we ettgiv 111 1.1.C61A.A., TV aavac a vac& cm,co 1/ell Vel eta U.i. LUG I. aataiflaupasataaa a.a..0..•.......••••1
it, no " hits," no straining after effect. A truth - he at the same time admits he could not Edinburgh, February, 1855. By Richard
ful man tells us his thoughts of life, and man, verify. On a question of mere style it is diffi-
and destiny. And a man who talks to us of cult, and perhaps not important, to form an Congreve, MA. London :J. W. Parker
such things honestly and without conven- opinion, but we think the following passage and Son.
t ionalism deserves to be listened to, even if from the work as happy in its description as it WE wish we could say that there is much
his hearers are obliged to dissent from many is true in judgment :-. either novel in view or correct in deduction
of his dicta. Mr. Hallam, who here and elsewhere expresses such in these four lectures. The subject was one
In conclusion, we will quote one short fervent admiration for liossuet's eloquence, says of capable of useful illustration at infinitely
sentence in which there is nothing cynical or Lather's Latin works, " their intemperance, their coarse- greater length than any lectures could afford ;
satirical. There is sympathising humanity n m ess, their inelegance, their sculityltheir wild paradoxes,
and flesh and blood feeling in this passage, that menace the foundations of religious morality, are nut but we fear the lecturer has not escaped the
too frequent fate of those who wish to apply
compensated, so fart' t least as my slight acquaintance
which certainly was penned by no moody with them extends, bmuch strength or acuteness, and to the present time and to passing events
misanthrope : still less by any impressive eloquence." To me, 1 own, in lessons which they suppose themselves to
animmiimmi......................imimmi11i

derive from the history of past times and of
nations and people with whom the moderns
have scarcely one point in common. The great
temptation in this kind of discussion is to
seize on fanciful similarities, and to invariably
mistake the post hoc for the propter hoc. For
ourselves we see a* little reason in predicating
our own future position or fate from that of
the Roman Empire as Croaker had in Gold-
smith's comedy for agreeing with the pro-
phecies of immediate national destruction,
read to him by his friend, who had omitted to
tell him that they " had been written in the
"reign of Queen Elizabeth." We select the fol-
lowing, for instance, from Mr. Congreve's lec-
tures as a passage interesting just at this
moment to every individual, from the most
overworked surgeon or commissariat clerk in
the Crimea to the nonchalant and jocular
Prime Minister himself :
All such States as the larger kingdoms of modern Europe,
with no exception as to our owu country, are not tit subjects
for the constitutional system. That system, with its fic-
tions and its indirect action, may offer advantages at certain
times—as, historically, it has done with us—but, on the
whole, I think it alien to good government. It has ever
failed,—and I appeal to the history of England in support '
of my assertion, and nut merely to the present disgraceful
state of our Government, though that is so much in accord-
once with past history as to exonerate, in a measure, the
men at the expense of the system ;—it is failing you now,
in the presence of real dangers and war. It is of more than
doubtful advantage in peace. The people of this country
must have felt of late that it is not a system of checks, with
the ultimate irresponsibility that is its result, but a vigorous
unity of administration, that is required for the right con-
duct of a war. The poor of this country feel the effects,
t hough they may not be aware of the cause, of the want of
a vigorous central executive—of a Government, in short,
in the place of parliamentary no-government. It may be
long before the necessity of so great a political change is
acknowledged, but it is, at any rate, a possibility that it
should be again acknowledged as it has; been; and it would
be desirable, that the atmosphere of political discussion
should be free enough to admit of such questions being
agitated, which, speaking generally, is hardly the case.
For myself, I heartily wish that the time were come when
we were clear of the government of boards, call them a
cabinet or a vestry, with all their complication of personal
and local interests, and under the government of one—a
protector or dictator, if you like to call him so—the name
is unimportant : the essential is, that he should be one
who would rule England as sho was ruled by Cromwell.

Now, all this we most potently disbelieve
It is founded on the vulgar fallacy that the des-
potic form of Government creates the ability
and genius of the individual who, by his per-
sonal will, wields the mighty engine. What
is the history of despotism but a narrative
of one great reign of glory, and even of internal
prosperity, followed, when the sceptre falls
into weaker hands, by disaster and disgrace?
Nor can elective despotisms show any other
rule. The power

To govern men and guide the State

may be so latent as to be impossible of detec-
tion till the situation calls it forth. It was so
in Napoleon 111. The truth is that parlia-
mentary government is as capable of being
impressed with a master hand as any other
form. What is wanted is the men; and so far
from men being " exonerated by a system "
in England, they are themselves guilty alike
of the system and its misuse. That since the
Whigs forced themselves into power by
threatening a servile war in 1830 no doubt the
systems of hoards and commissions has been
created, and created from motives the most
corrupt and sordid from which governmental
changes were ever attempted. But there is
abundance of vigour in the parliamentary
system and no indisposition whatever in Par-
lament itself to give to any Ministry the most
ample powers of action, if that Ministry has
itself given no reasons for distrust. If
we have " a parliamentary no-government"
it is because we have men in power
who have thrust themselves into a posi-
tion to which they were prompted by
corruption or conceit, and in which they have
openly, and without shame, displayed that they
seek no more than the inert enjoyment of their
places. The aspiration at the end of the above
extract is scarcely complete. The lecturer
should in fairness, when he wished for Crom-
well, have desired that Richard should succeed
him, or, to speak of what is more important,
should have well considered what he desired
when he referred to that ten years of dark
despotism—dark equally to the general
historian and the cursory reader—during
which life and property were held in the