Northern Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1857-11-24 00:00:00

THOUGHTS FOR THE LAITY ABOUT THE
MACNAUGHT CONTROVERSY.

Previous to the days of the great Francis Bacon,
men used to carry on their controversies as much
as they do now. That master genius perceived
that there had always been two orders of intellects
—the stable-minded, who had deep insight into
the nature of disputes, and based all their reason-
ing on facts ; and another order, who were always
or theorising, and bending lactate suit their theories,
else ignoring them altogether, which was by far the
most convenient method of gettingrid of a disputant.
Bacon also perceived that the men themselves
had not noticed that there was a principle involved
in the difference between the two orders. He
pointed out the principle, and showed that the
men who found out the truth, and were able to
maintain it against the world, if necessary,
were those who searched out the facts and
arranged them in proper order, and, after discover-
ing the laws that regulated the subject under
consideration, had, for convenience and perspicuity,
• established a theory. This has been acknow-
ledged ever since, by men of minds and science,
to be the only true and reliable method of philo-
sophising. Although this is the method adopted
by scholars, nevertheless we find men ready
enough to adopt the exploded one. But the latter
are always found amongst the minds less educated,
or less naturally endowed; or else amongst those
who have some old decaying system to prop up.
We now find a controversy going on between
two classes of divines, those who maintain that
the scriptures are infallible, and those who say that
they contain errors, and therefore are not infallible.
*The former have had a theory handed down to
them, and endeavour to sustain their preposition
by appeals to the very document in dispute, which
is tantamount to begging the question, or to
declaring, before it shall be proved, that the docu-
ment is what they assert it to be, namely, infallible.
Then, wi h this assumed. which they ought to
prove, they proceed to establish, by means of their
groundless assumption, the very point that should
have been originally argued Thus, assumption is
'Substituted for proof, and their words about that
very assumption are designated proof itself. In
every instance where facts are pointed to as telling
against them, like the man who was reminded that
facts were dead against his theory, they gravely
assert so much the worse for the facts, and there-
fore refuse to recognise them.
The other class of divines in this controversy
leave out of sight, for a time, the theory which they
have been brought up to believe, and begin to
arrange the facts, and then deduce the theory
which they maintain, namely, that the Bible, how-
ever holy, is not without its errors, and they do
not shrink from adducing -some of the many
proofs they have for affirming their proposition.
It must, therefore, in justice, be said that the
latter party commend themselves to the
attention and consideration of the thieking
laity more than the former, who seem
to ignore the principles on which scientific subjects
are treated, and without which nothing but con-
fusion and inexplicable jargon can be the result of
discussions. There is some truth, however, in that
which is urged by the former and popular party,
namely—that religion and science are two diffe.
rent subjects. The one has all to do with the
feelings, and the other with the intellect; the one
is subject to laws that regulate matter and mind,
and the other has to do with the aspirations of the
heart. But it is also true that theology and science
are species and genus--that theology is as much a
science as geology or any of the other ologies. It
should have its canons or rules of interpretation,
by which the Scriptures are interpreted. Other-
wise, how would men know when to read a passage
in its literal sense, and when in its metaphorical ?
There are three canons of interpretation. That of
the Romanists is, that Scripture is to be always
read literally, except when the Church shall other-
wise interpret it. That of the Nartow Church is,
to interpret each passage, sa as to get out of it the
meaning which they desire, as tending to establish
some favourite dogma of their own. That of the
Bread Church is, to try and reach the stand-point
of each writer, so as to learn what he meant by his
own words, and having thus obtained the original
meaning of each passage, to apply or reject ito
principles according to its suitableness, or uestli-
ableness, under present circumstances.
Any one reading Mr. Love's book on Inepisation,
or Mr. Glszsbroek's letters in the Courier, will at
once percsive that there is something in their
writings which is not at all sathfactory to a mind
craving for accuracy of thought and expression.
Principles they have none. Theirs is a slip-sl:o I
style of logic. They start a theory, and to that
theory they will bend all the facts of the Scriptures;
and if some facts tell dead against them, why then
they must put a sritined and forced meaning on
them. They do not, for one moment, think
making allowance for national peculiarities and
idionsyncracies, nor for different states of eivilisa-
Aion. They jumble all Sc:ieturel books and texts
together, and make an oils podrida'' of it, and
very podrida (rotten) it is David's ethics and
those of our Lord, are as different and ea widely
contrasted ae the poles; but yet they can see no
diffiuley in harmonising them. Though the one
prays to have his enemies destroyed, and the collet
prays for their forgiveness, yet there is no pre-
gressiveness that they can see. They read of the
Israeli Les attributing ail mechanical and other skill
to the miraculous intervention of the Great First
Cause ; and though they find that people more
highly civilised than the Irac:ites, he weeee pious
—and, indeed, although they themselves, when
talking or writing on nay Other than ragieua sub-
jects, attribute all a quit-erne:its to secondary
causes ; yet, :Shen speaking or writing on theo-
logical subjects, they are ever ready to shut thcir
eyes to the advances of science, a"d to ignore all
second causes, and to trace every c- fre;:t to the diri•et
and miraculous action of the One First Cause. Thus
they constantly endeavour to meke themselves
appear to think es the primitive people thought, in
order that their orthodoxy may not be tali-e t in
question. It', now, the laity wish to have an intd•
-rigout theological system free from ail puzz'a and
unintelligible lirgon, one they can easiiy compre-
hend without doing vioieece to their understand
inns and corn,non sense, aid ens that will not
require them, at every turn, to go to their priest
for 1113 craft to enlighten h_'l7l, and to tell them
what to believe and what not to believe without
reference to th, it own consciences, they had better
adopt the more rational of the two systex.s, the
broad church method which cowmen is itself to

men of learning and manly piety.
This i 3 altogether a hymit.'s question, alihou'h
the laity are allowing it to be too much fought for
them, by the courage and strength of a few :aithful
and enlightened Clergy men. We repeat, this is a
layman's question—becau3e in proportion as men
keep their minds free from. beiNg warped and
twisted by false reasoning on tho one hand, and
from being emacullied and elfeminated by the

dread of facing questions of diflicully on the-other
hand, so will they be fitted to encounter the stern
reelities of life. and to seer over the troubled

ocean, without making shipwreck on the many
sh als (..n which the simple and childish portion of

mankind are continually "bein.2 destroyed.

BOYS' CLOTHING MADE WITH Cat FA TASTE, at:LEWIS:app
COMPANY'S, Ranelagh street.