The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1897-08-01

ouestionabed about DeboIah eHuV
mont OF Jaels act In almost the very
words addressed TO the Virgin Mother,
said: 'For my part / want no pe'.er
morality than that OF the blplo, eIo 10
other proof OF an action being praise
worthy than that the blpie mas
IL worthy OF praise.
THE NEW CRITICISM.
=. a.. COR the thoughtful and observant
-. ~ readers referred TO above that
the New Criticism has q message ana
.,o.t smportant one. as the prVscns
,,'~,,cr can testify from experience IN"
,,r,ncs them. as the grand result
t.eIoes outcome OF its lapoIs' q
.i,N - Inc Bible and its origin W i.'o,
49,, NJ a stroke all the olilou'. -
ava rcnollent features developer ~ w
old view. - ,r1e I'm place
~ being "a single document INN, an,enses.
tated TO a number OF mere 1tnrarv
80 primarily regarded as d 49,
Is 10 ~ 81 "A nations literature com
81 ~, ~. r,anv men OF various capa1is'o'
pV.9',,,.-,,,aI and moral, at various -
l.s..o,,,,., through many centuii os' st,N
,,.1a odited annotated, anu
Cd again and again ,,a Volumes his
- II contains among us 49, songs.
l. l"' ~ law codes dramas soli i,.,,
49,. almost every variety Ca ~
lesenuo 49,, and that the aulhoIS
49,, ,.,rious documents WIo'o - lin
'neso 49,, minds and under All lhe ~
o. go ,nDosed by their e"NA 49,,
- ,..,, and location. 50 that son'o "a be
"a hut limited information come
D,ents which they descrlDeu' CIV, otbor
h,,t imperfect views as 10 nc" - 81
Questions. and all Of them Un's .I
cnfiac knowledge OF tne'r e1'l' ", critic
with an this, however inc - 49, and All.
recognizes that these Wil'e''' - 90 in
80 oe 20 include in their coi'po9l.'o'
aptt,t,, contributing TO such TO rev"
80, ~ Gods nature and HIS rela'lous
-, &c &C. found no where else anu
,i5 NOT have been derived lIoih i'N''
observation and reelection .,.a,,o,
mi. re,,elation. however was graou'i
"a ,,,oereesive and therefore in It's ear
H.. .iacos imperfect. 50 that the views
entertained and expressed by uio
,rtt.r writer's were inadequate
ana in this way Incorrect d"
when ehovah is first aesciioI
oe a mere tribal deity and win an NE
,oorphic attributes; the truer conc ~
nr n snirituaI ruler of the universe de-
81
surroundings. In each case, however the
,,ie,vs taught were the highest adapted
80 Tho stage OF development reached ny
tho neople among whom the authors hYeu
and wrote.
CEASE TO TROUBLE.
ADnroacbed from this point of view an
+bo contradictions. Inadequate express
sions and morally repellant statement -
1850 10 trouble the student lie sees
I'm. . noet Of more than Miltonic genius
and imagination. but living before the
gciences Of physical astronomy or seolo-
ov were even dreamed or lnspiIeu WIN
The Great truth that there was one "ou,
maker of the universe in every pai' az
I'm all it's details grand ana minute oo. .,-.
H. an ace of gross polytheism Wheh we
in '-ii ,a-,soi,es were regarded as the
efrs,,r,1o, OF the elements, compose SUI
49, rnem 40 teach his contemporaries
g., 1onguaee and by figures they coulu
.,-.l,~etond and which would also agree
10 bfe own understanding Of snrrOuhu-
inc, nature. this great lesson fh"t @ou
,oe5o the heavens and the earth' not now
cod made this universe; for that might
1o veil LEFT for man to discover niue Dy
little. I'm future ages.
win the same guiding conception ne
can see how an earlier writer, WIN 70
noetic genius and imagination couiu
weave out Of ancient legends morai al
laqorv fitted TO teach further OF o'hci
ioeeone and 10 illustrate problems. sucn
as that of the origin OF evil "hlch gu"
wait for their solution.
Yet again. under like guidance ne can
sec how a primitive historian, when de
ecribing events Of his own or carrier
times might honestly refer to certain
oote as specifically directed by God, or
orproved bv Him. which 10 OUT higher
senso Of morality and more adequate con
lin ~ the divine nature could not be
,rho v,ritcr I'm Samuel who described
.5.-. ovocution of the sons OF saul no
foubt believed that such propiutalloh OF
act Of yicarious vengeance WhicneNei
we NAV consider it, was agreeapie 10
Jehovah. but we have no more reason ~
believe with him than with lhe Ia'eI
lows who regarded the fall Of the tower
~ SLOAN as special providence OF
refribution. or with the misguided eccle-
ei8stic who recently referred to the ter
rible holocaust at the Charity Bazaar al
paris as a vicarious sacrifice OF innocent
victims for the sins Of unbelievers.
Such then. as the present writer under
stands. is what the New Criticism has
done for a large class OF present or pros
pective readers of the Bible and we may
next ask What has it done for the Bible
itself and for the love and reverence
which thoughtful and observing men can
give 81? To this question the reply OBJ
viouslv is that II has removed the Bible
from a false position I'm which there was
claimed for II what it nowhere claims for
itself and cannot support when calmly
ane honestly Intercepted. and has placed
ID where 10 can sustain the full lieht OF
the most searching INVESTIGATION without
detriment TO its true dignity and au-
thority
TWO VIEWS OF CREATION
The case is exactly parallel TO the two
views Of creation; the old view of crea-
ton by fiat with fossils and like evil
dcnces Of progressive change to be ex-
planned as limitations or deceptive APP
pearances intended as trials Of our faith.
ard creation by evolution which asks for
no such special pleading or straining Of
evidence. Just as the universe is no less
grand and worthy Of its divine originator
when viewed as the result Of a progress
sivc process carried on by the always
imminent Will of the Creator through
aeons Of centuries, than when II is viewed
as produced in six days by series or
fats, so the Bible Is no less divine and
worthy OF its author If we believe IT 10
have been developed progressively and
by the use Of familiar methods. than if
we regarded IL as the work Of a divine
dictator dscarding familiar methods and
producing . document supernatural in
al It's details.
I'm the above / have considered and
compared .he old and the new methods OF
Biblical study, simply as TO their effects,