The sun., 1901-04-14


lists and Bishop Colenso escaped conviction.
| The Committee of Privy Council, If II was
| judicial. was also political, and IL was re-
| solved, If possible to avert rupture IN
| the state Church. Veteran lawyers had
| little difficulty in finding grounds for ac-
! quttal when they did not choose to con-
Wet The language OF the impugned writings
was seldom SO precise as to defy the power
! Of interpretation Either the passage
means what say, or il has no meaning,
| Numbered the counsel for the prosecution.
Is n not possible, Mr.. Blank, that the
| passage may have no meaning" was the
reply of the Judge. The Rev. Mr.. Noysey,
however. succeeded in obtaining the honor
Of a conviction. rendered a week TO re-
portunity they had given him Of rejecting
| the offer Of repurchasing his once cherished
position in the Established Church by pro-
claiming himself hypocrite.
EIampden. regus professor Of theology
at Oxford. formed another object Of High
| Church attack. He had been condemned
by the university on account OF doctrines
alleged to be -Trinitarian. and his ap-
pontment by whig Ministry to Bishopric
caused renewal Of the onslaught. which.
however. only served by its failure to en-
| phasize the fact that the Church Of England
was in complete subjection to the state.
In this, az in the general commotion, promi-
nently figured Wilberforce. Bishop Of Ok
ford. son OF the great evangelical and
philanthropist. man gifted, dexterous
and versatile. who would have made a
hrst-rate advocate OF politician. balancing
! himself with one foot on his hereditary
! Evangellcism. the other on High Church.
manship. 10 which in his heart. as a HER
arch. he inclined A character so ambgu-
ous could make little impression, however
great his abilities might be-
James Anthony Froude had been a
! follower and fellow worker OF Newman.
! But on Newman's secession he not only
hung back. but violently recoiled and pro-
| duced highly sceptical work, The Nemesis
! Of Faith" which entailed his resignation
of a clerical fellowship in an oxford college
| Then he exemplned the strange variations
. of the age by coming out as an historian
| inthe colors Of Carlyle.
Carlyle himself is not 10 be left out Of
sight in an account Of the progress of re-
| Iigious thought for his Scotch Calvinism.
! Transmitted into hero worship, has taken
a strong hold. n not on the distinct con-
! victions, on the sentiment and temper Of
/ the nation. If he has administered whole
some rebuke 20 the self-complacency Of
| democracy with It's ballot box. he has also
set up worship Of force and kindled a
! spirit OF violence totally subversive of the
Sermon on the Mount.
Matthew Arnold, with his silver shafts
was rathera connoisseur in all lines than a
serious philosopher or theologian; but he
also. with his conversion Of God into the
mot ourselves which makes for righteous
ness" did something in his light but in
sinuatng and charming wayto forward dis
integration.
But In ls7I-T appeared Supernatural
Religion, searching and uncompromlsing
inquiry into the historical evidences OF
supernatural Christianity. The book,
though attacked on secondary points with
perhaps superior learning by Bishop Light
foot, Bishop Westcott, and others, cannot
be said to have met with any general answer.
supplemented In some respects by Or.
Martineau's Seat Of Authority in Re-
ligon and other works on the same side.
It sets forth the sceptio's case against the
! supernatural.
Miracles. says criticism. belong 10 an age
| Of ignorance. With the dawn of knowl-
edge they diminish. In It's meridian light
they disappear. The Jews were eminenuy
/ addicted 10 belief in miracles There was
Satanic miracle az well as divine; nor
| can any distinction be drawn as a matter
! OF evidence between the two. As little
can any distinction be drawn in point OF
evidence between the Gospel miracles
and the ecclesiastical miracles. which ney-
! ertheless Protestants reject. The miracles
OF one sort, the Demoniac, are bound ND
with the Jewish belief in Possession bv
personal devils, from which all Efforts to
! dlsentanGle them so rs 10 resolve them into
! cures Of lunacy by moral influence are vain.
! The four Gospels and the Acts, which con-
! prise the historic evidences, are all anonv-
NOUS, all OF uncertain authorship. The
! first three Gospels are evident incrnsta-
| tons upon an older document which Ia
| lost and about which nothing IS known
In not one OF the five cases can the existence
! OF the book be traced TO the time of the
events or time SO near the events AS 10
| preclude the growth Of fable in a highly
superstitions and totally uncrtical age.
| Tho presentation OF Christs character
and teaching In the fourth GOSPEL which
! ia Alexandrian, Is far from identical with
the presentation in the first three Gospels,
which are Jewish. There are irreconclable
| discrepancies between the Gospels as TO
matters OF fact. notably In regard to the
! genealogy Of Christ, the length Of his mis-
| sion. the Last supper. the day of the CRU
| Cifixion. the details OF the Resurrection
and the Ascension. Such miracles as the
miraculous darkness. the earthquake the
rending OF the veil OF the Temple, the OPEN
Ing OF the tombs and the apparitlon OF the
! dead In the streets Of Jerusalem, being TO-
tally unconfrmed by history or by any
recorded effect, stagger belief. Such testi-
mony as st, Paul bears TO the Resurrection
Is second hand, Is that Of a convert in the
ecstasy OF conversion, and is manifcstly
! uncntlcal. His own enthusiasm is inte!li-
gble on merely human grounds We may
/ be sure that had God become incarnats