and Mr. Leigh; by the diligent researches of Newton and Locke, and by the acute reasoning of Lyttleton and West. These great men however took pains to acquire the appropriate knowledge, in the same way as they, or other men of sense, qualify themselves for the attainment of any object of pursuit; by employing the proper means and bestowing the necessary time. They did not come forward to edify or enlighten the public, till they had sought and acquired the requisite qualifications for such an important undertaking.

It is not so with some of modern date, who have assumed the office of advisers and instructors in religion. They have rushed into the arena of controversy with scarcely one previous qualification; and they have erected themselves into despots over the opinions of other men without any serious, or at least effectual, endeavour to form their own opinions correctly.

Singular should seem the hazards, to which the interests of Revealed Religion are exposed, when its avowed professors so continually offer to the eyes of its real friends a motley scene of paradox and inconsistency. Some of her loudest advocates look with

a Sir M. Hale's character and writings are sufficiently known through his Life by Bishop Burnet. Sir N. Knatchbull published Animadversiones in Libros Novi Testamenti, of which Poole availed himself in compiling his most useful Synopsis. The Critica Sacra of Edward Leigh, Esq. is well known, as well as various other works of deep learning in theology; but the name does not appear in Poole's Catalogue of Commen

tators.

apparent indifference upon the claims of morality. All no doubt feel themselves eager to promote the credit, and extend the knowledge, of the Gospel : yet there are, who so grievously misconceive its spirit, as to exhibit a melancholy spectacle of uncharitableness. Others again, who have laid but a slender foundation for the support of their own judgement, seem to have no misgiving as to their ability to guide others; nor do they scruple to express a keen sense of disappointment, and even displeasure, if their advice be not readily followed and their interpretations implicitly received.

Among the strange occurrences of modern times, we have seen formal and dogmatical treatises written by persons unprofessional upon the most abstruse doctrines of Christianity, without any reference whatever to the original language, in which those doctrines are recorded. Yet it is perfectly clear, that all questions about Scriptural doctrines can only be determined by the actual signification of that original language. All matters of controversy concerning them are neither more nor less than so many differences of opinion about the import of the original terms.

Now let us imagine a person totally ignorant of the Greek language, or but slightly acquainted with it, interposing his judgement upon a disputed passage in Homer or Pindar, Eschylus or Sophocles, Plato or Thucydides. Suppose him not only to interpose his judgement in it, but to maintain his opinion obstinately against another, who had devoted much of his time to the study of the language, and was accustomed to weigh the niceties of its structure and

the peculiarities of its idiom. Would not all such interposition be justly deemed rash and presumptuous? Would it be any justification for such a one to say, that he had carefully studied the words of a translation? The translation no doubt may bring him acquainted with the general contents of a work; but, however well executed, it cannot be infallible; and, in matters of doubt, can only be appealed to as containing the opinion of the translators. Yet this very course is continually pursued in reference to the Holy Scriptures. Men, who judge in haste and who are ill qualified to judge at all, not only form their own opinions upon disputed points according to the sense they affix to the version (which version must itself be often expressed in ambiguous terms);--but they confidently oppose their own conclusions to those of sound scholars and able divines. When the eunuch of Ethiopia was reading a passage in the prophet Esaias, and the apostle Philip inquired, "Understandest thou what thou readest?" the modest and candid answer of the eunuch was, "How can I, except some man should guide me?" The shrewd observation of Grotius upon his reply was this: "Non putabat tam perspicuam esse Scripturam Sacram, ut nunc faciunt, non sellularii tantum, sed et feminæ." "He did not imagine the meaning of Holy Scripture to be so clear, as now-a-days it is thought by artisans and females."

t

The mention of Grotius is peculiarly apposite to the topic on which I am discoursing; and his example may be usefully proposed for imitation. Grotius was

a layman, yet was he a profound scholar and an able divine. He was much engaged with the civil transactions of his time: nevertheless he found leisure to pursue those studies which had occupied his attention in youth, and vigorously and successfully did he apply the mighty powers of his mind, and the ample fruits of his industry, to the illustration of the Holy Scriptures.

2. Let us however, in the next place, consider the nature, and, in some degree define the extent, of these voluntary but most important studies.

So many excellent books have at various times been written upon every branch of theological knowledge, that the task of selection is rendered not only very difficult, but almost invidious. Yet selection is necessary, lest alarm should be created by magnitude or multiplicity. In this too, as in other pursuits, an attentive student soon learns, in the course of preparatory reading, where to direct his future labours with effect.

Considering therefore that the inquiries now recommended must be pursued in connexion with other objects of grave and laborious research, I shall content myself with mentioning as excellent guides for establishing the authenticity and truth of the several books of Holy Writ, Bishop Stillingfleet's Origines Sacræ, or an Exposition of the grounds of our belief in the Old Testament; with Locke's Reasonableness of Christianity; Paley's masterly view of Evidence, and an occasional reference to Lardner's Credibility, in proof of the Divine origin of the New.

a

As to the subject-matter of religion, it is quite obvious that the principles of Natural Religion should no more be overlooked, than those doctrines which are revealed. And here perhaps a satisfactory guide may be found in some excellent and elaborate discourses of Archbishop Tillotson and Dr. Clarke; the former delivered in this very chapel. Cudworth, Wollaston, Tucker, and Hartley, will justly claim a share of our attention on this point. The doctrines of Revealed Religion can be ascertained only by a diligent perusal of the Holy Scriptures. Here therefore we must solicit the aid of a faithful as well as intelligent commentator. Upon the Old Testament the labours of Le Clerc may be found most generally useful; but there are many in our own language; for instance, those of Lowth and Patrick, with various modern versions of the prophetical books by Bishop Lowth, Archbishop Newcome, and others.

On the New Testament, the paraphrase of Clarke and of Pyle will lead to a ready perception of the meaning in many difficult places. But the more regular comments of Hammond and Whitby should also be consulted; and in order to understand the peculiar nature of the idiom in which the New Testament was written, I again refer with pleasure to the labours of one of my most learned predecessors, Gataker. Here also may be introduced some dissertations prefixed to Campbell's Translation of the Gospels, and Valckenaer's Scholæ upon some of the Gospels and Epistles.

a See Acts xiv. 17. xvii. 24, etc. Rom. i. 19. ii. 14. Heb. xi. 6.