an inductive process, and our adherence to that belief in the face of the inexplicable difficulties which are involved in it, is just in the very character of a true Baconian or experimental philosopher, when, on the evidence of facts, he resolutely credits them as facts, though utterly at a loss for their reasons or their principles. The other way, of beginning with the complex or comprehensive proposition before you have discussed the evidence of the separate ones, gives a certain a priori character to the whole speculation, and has the effect, I think, of exhibiting it with less of that character of strength, and rationality, and sound criticism, which in theology is sound observation, than really belong to it.

It is truly instructive to observe* that the only verse which was conceived to give a Scriptural expression of what I have called the complex or comprehensive proposition, is given up, and, I believe, warrantably and rightly given up, by the great majority of critics. All Scripture is profitable; and if the separate propositions are clearly expressed there, but not the general one, what is this to say but that the main edification and practical benefit of the doctrine lay in its elementary truths, and not in the generalized article which the controversialists have drawn out of it? We dispute not the soundness of their deduction, we dispute not the necessity of a generalized expression in opposition to heretics who set themselves in opposition even to the separate and elementary truths; but when we find that these truths, instead of being exhibited in conjunction in the Bible, are brought forward in almost every instance individually and by themselves, what is this but to say that the great moral and practical influence of this revelation lies in our being made to know that the Son, our Saviour, is God, and that the Spirit, our Sanctifier, is God? It is delightful to understand that in preaching we have not to perplex ourselves with the adjustments of the schoolmen, which, though they did achieve the service of lifting up a safeguard against the influence of heresy, did not, at the same time, change the essential quality of scriptural truth, or the power * See vol. ii., p. 273.

of that truth when scripturally stated and enforced on the consciences of men. I can not too earnestly or repeatedly insist upon it, that your business in the pulpit is to be expounders of the scriptural and not expounders of the schoJastic theology. It is indeed remarkable that there is no explicit assertion of the union between the persons in the Godhead in the Bible, however fairly and, indeed, irresistibly, that union is deducible from the separate propositions which enter into the doctrine of the Trinity. Still we never find it brought forward in this general form for any moral or practical purpose, as our Saviour's divinity is, for example, to enforce the virtue of condescension and humility. Indeed, whether any moral was expressly founded or not on the separate proposition of Christ being God and the Spirit being God, the relations in which they respectively stand to us, the offices which they discharge in our behalf, give the highest practical consequence to the information that each of them is divine. I should like if, as the result of our earnest and oft-recurring observations on this topic, you learned to disengage the scholastic from the scriptural when enforcing from the pulpit any of the doctrines which are related to the Trinity; and I should further rejoice if, in virtue of the frequency wherewith we have applied it, it were impressed on you as a general principle that might be carried over the whole extent of doctrinal theology.

Let me not be understood, however, as meaning to convey, that because inexpedient in the pulpit, these articles of an artificial theology were useless to the Church. They served an important purpose; and, in point of fact, Arianism was unheard of many centuries after the termination of the Nicene controversy, during which period the elementary propositions might have been enforced on the consciences of men without disturbance. The truth is, that profound controversy and profound Scripture criticism stand to right pulpit doctrine very much in the same relation. Neither will extend very materially the domain of religious truth, but each fulfills a high and important function by the line. of circumvallation which they throw around the domain,

by the barriers which they have presented against the incursions of heresy. This service has been alike accomplished by our polemics and our philologists; but it follows not that our pastors should introduce either the argumentation of the one or the criticism of the other into the pulpit. They have, however, done inestimable good, notwithstanding, in that they have warded off the invasions of heresy, and thrown a canopy of defense around the faith of our cottage patriarchs.

When it is said that the attempt to reconcile the Trinity with the unity of God has been more in the way of speculation than of Scripture criticism, let it be recollected that each of the elementary propositions rested on Scripture. criticism alone, and that the generalized expression of them in the proposition of the doctrine of the Trinity is not properly speculation. The object of speculation is to find out ligaments or bonds of connection between the distinct separate truths, which bonds or ligaments Scripture has not made known to us, and it is not to be wondered at that in this particular there should be no information whatever elicited by Scripture criticism.

"In order to do justice to the Catholic system," Dr. Hill says, "it is necessary to state the manner in which those who hold the system endeavored to reconcile the divine unity with the subsistence of the three persons." Here I demur. To give a complete view of the literature of the question it may be necessary to state all the attempts which have been made toward this reconciliation, but it is not by a statement of these attempts that justice is done to the question itself, or to the Catholic system. Calvin, in his noted deliverance of great, but I think of wise generality, made no attempt to reconcile the elementary propositions with each other, but only brought them into juxtaposition, and wove so many simple affirmations into a comprehensive and complex one. This is only reassembling the elementary truths in one sentence, it is not reconciling them; and I contend that ample justice is done to the Catholic system * Vol. ii., P. 285.

if it can be shown that each of the simple propositions is based on Scriptural statement, and the complex or general proposition has been rightly deduced out of them. All that follows then, I hold, is a very close treading on the margin that separates the known from the unknown, and perhaps a pressing inward sometimes on the ulterior region. At the same time I do think the matter managed by Principal Hill with a delicacy and a generality which do credit both to his judgment and taste; and as I particularly admire the ultimate deliverance which he has come to on the subject, we need not shrink, now that we have come so near to the end of our journey, from the same full and minute description of the remainder that we have observed along the whole of that continuous and protracted way, through which, with such exemplary patience, you have traveled.

BOOK III.-CHAP. X.-SECT. IV.

AMOUNT OF OUR KNOWLEDGE RESPECTING THE TRINITY.

THE PRAYER.

We acknowledge and repent before Thee, O God, the sinfulness of our nature. Make us more deeply sensible thereof, that we may be led to prize the remedy of the gospel, and be reduced to a thankful acquiescence in its overtures of reconciliation. Do Thou manifest the truth of Thy word to our consciences, and give us not only to discern there such a picture of ourselves as may convince us of sin, but such a fullness in the offered salvation as may cause us to rejoice in the worth and sufficiency of our Saviour. Be with us now and ever. Amen.

We can not fail here* to remark the substantial unity of the two Established Churches of Great Britain in respect of doctrine, though not in respect of government or of form; unity, therefore, in regard to that on which the Bible has explicitly delivered itself, variety in regard to that on which the Bible has left no very distinct or authoritative statement at * See vol. ii., p. 301.

al. In spite, however, of this, their substantial unity, I have no wish that they should ever be united, holding it wise not to attempt an incorporation which, if attempted, would be resisted, and thinking it quite possible that two Churches may be one in charity though unlike in constitution, of the same faith under different forms.

It here occurs to me to say, that I hold it a high point of Christian wisdom not to give offense by the introduction of trifling novelties into the service of a congregation, even although they should be real improvements as far as they go. The Apostle Paul I hold a perfect example of tact and delicacy in this respect, and have often admired the dexterity wherewith he applies the light of a clear and important principle to the questions of minuter casuistry. To him it was a trifle whether he ate flesh or not, but if it were to offend a weak brother he would not eat flesh while the world standeth. There was a fine combination in this; strength of conscience along with the utmost tenderness for the infirmities of the weak. It is the very combination I should like you all to realize, superiority to vulgar prejudices, but along with this the utmost indulgence, save when the higher interests of truth and godliness were at stake, a kind and considerate indulgence for vulgar feelings. The introduction of the organ into public worship I give as one example of what I mean. You may not care about it, perhaps rather like it on the whole, yet if it gave serious distress to but one of the congregation, I should hold this a paramount reason for not insisting upon it. The practice of standing at the psalms may be specified as another. I have known the utmost clamor and dissatisfaction excited on both of these occasions, and even witnessed a great parochial effervescence on the practice being abolished of reading out the line. I mention these instances merely for the sake of giving greater distinctness to the general lesson of an enlightened forbearance with each other in the mere circumstantials of worship, in contrast to the furious intolerance and zeal which characterized and at the same time disgraced a former age.in piifelor eddig