The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1881-04-06

pean literature of the 10th century to re-
member the sensation made among secular
scholars when the great historian Me
buhr applied the Higher Criticism" in
use among the German Divines, to Roman
history. The results were remarkable
The men of that age were taught that
when they believed the Roman historians
themselves, like Livy, they were, in large
part, accepting mere myths and fables
The critic taught them to rise above a
slavish dependence on mere testimony,
and, in high, judicial spirit, to decide
tor themselves, from internal constituencies
and probabilities or the opposites, what
was the real source of the variations COM
ing down from remote ages. The results
obtained by the higher criticism in the
hands of the learned Germans, have be-
come more and more remarkable. The
learned reader Will remember, for in
stance, the conclusions of the "Tubingen
School, some centuries ago. They no.
ticed, for instance, that while the three
"synoptic gospels" recorded the circum-
stance that Simon, Cyrenian was i'm
pressed to bear the cross of the fainting
Jesus, the gospel of John suppresses that
circumstance. Now, the critics observed,
that Basilides the Gnostic-who hourished
In the second century, first half-had
made use of this history about the sub
stitution OF Simon, to support the Gnostic
dogma, that it was not the Messiah, but
common Jew, who was actually cruel
fed. 1t is also known that the Catholic
Christians Of the second century were
very inimical to all the Gnostic tenets.
When these facts were viewed together,
it became obvious to the higher criti-
cism, that the fourth gospel suppressed
this narrative about Simon, for the pur-
pose OF taking away this handle" from
Basilides people and that, therefore.
that gospel was written by some Cath
Ollie Christian" about the middle of the
second century, certainly after Basilides,
and was falsely ascribed to the holy
Apostle John.
Reflection upon this judicial method
soon convinced me that subsequent his
tories contain great deal of legendary
matter, which must be expurgated by a
more enlightened criticism. There is the
history, for instance, of that remarkable
Empire, that of the Yankees which, we
are told, began some centuries ago as a
federal republic. The accepted histories
state that the independence of these con-
federated republics began in the year
1776 of their era, with printed ode
claration" "a very pedantic way of found
ing an empire, as it strikes US Asiatics) :;
that the author Of this document was
Thomas Jefferson, of Virginia, afterwards
twice President. But let the following
facts, which we have cleaned from the
more authentic remains of those early
histories, be weighed in the scales of the
q higher criticism. That declaration e"
states, as one Of its grievances under the
British rule, that the king had forced
African slaves on the unwilling colonies
by an unjust and cruel slave-trade. 1t
also postulates this truth as "self-evi-
dent" that all men are by nature equal
and are inalienably entitled to life, lib
erty, and the pursuit of happiness" The
supposed author, while twice President,
made no effort to remove African slavery
1t is also authenticity related of him,
that he did not lberate his own slaves {;
but on the contrary, nearly half cen
fury after his pretended authorship of
this Declaration" having become in
volved in heavy debts, he sought from
his State special law to enable him to
sell his slaves by lottery into perpetual
slavery.
Now the competent critic cannot fail
to observe a violent incompatibility be-
tween these facts and Jefferson's author
ship OF that document. That hypothesis
must be surrendered and some other
date and author must be sought for it,
Fortunately, other authentic facts guide
the philosophic historian to a conclusion
not encountered with any of the absurdi-
ties which beset the former hypothesis.
W. ~ooJ ILL l.. IL - 1 c.h ,