It must not, therefore, be concluded that this community was ever to realise itself in the form of a state. The fundamental principle of the Christian community is, that there shall be no other subordination than that of its members to GOD and CHRIST, and that this shall be absolute; while, in regard to each other, they are to be upon the footing of complete equality. CHRIST Himself drew a striking contrast between His own community and all political organizations in this respect." (p. 124.) The interpretation, placed by Neander on the passage here referred to, has scarcely the merit even of plausibility. Let us place it before our readers: "And He said unto them, The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and they that exercise authority upon them are called benefactors. 66 But ye shall not be so: but he that is greatest among you, (óμsiv v uv,) let him be as the younger; and he that is chief, as he that doth serve."* It is hardly possible that a commentator, not pre-determined to refuse admittance to any argument which might serve as the basis of belief in an ordained government and priesthood in CHRIST'S Church, could gather from these words the doctrine of the absolute equality of Christians. How far more simple and natural is the following paraphrase of the great S. Basil :† "Let not him that is chief be puffed up by his dignity, lest he fall away from the blessedness of humility; but let him know that true humility is the ministering unto many. As, then, he who attends many wounded, and wipes away the blood from their wounds, least of all men enters on the service for his own exaltation, much more ought he to whom is committed the care of his sick brethren as the minister of all, about to render an account of all, to be thoughtful and anxious. And so let him that is greatest be as the younger. Again, it is meet that those who are in the chief places should be ready to offer also bodily service after our LORD's example, Who washed His disciples' feet. Hence it follows: And he that is chief, as he that doth serve.” So much as regards the one passage adduced by the writer in support of his own theories of the Church. Now to insist upon the views which (as held by the doctors of the English Church) stand in opposition to the perverted imaginations of the writer of this work, would require, not an article, but a series of entire treatises. We must, consequently, content ourselves with referring, in a foot-note, to such volumes as furnish the most power * S. Luke xxii. 25, 26. In loc. cited in the Catena Aurea. Field on the Church; Bishop Pearson on the Creed, Art. "Holy Catholic Church;" Dr. Moberly's Sermons on the Great Forty Days; Gladstone's Church Principles, pp. 85-157 (one of the best reasoned and most philosophic chapters in that work); Archdeacon Wilberforce on the Incarnation, p. 315 et seqq. ful antidote to the vagueness which must necessarily result from such teaching, when carried out in practice, and meantime denounce the entire theory as utterly unscriptural. Throughout the pages of Holy Writ the Church is spoken of as a kingdom. "In the days of these kings shall the GOD of heaven set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed; and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever." "Repent ye, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand." "Go ye and preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand."* A kingdom of necessity implies government, and government involves subordination and inequality. But throughout this many-paged volume, we have not met with one sentence which displays any recognition of such passages of the Epistles as bid men honour those who are set over them in the LORD; and what is a far sadder, though we believe a necessary consequence, there is not one passage from which we can imagine the writer to have caught so much as a glimpse of that spiritual view of the Church, which forms the very key-note of that wonderful epistle to the Ephesians, wherein we are taught that the Church is the very body of CHRIST, "the fulness of Him that filleth all in all." But it is time to turn to our second charge against Neander's work, namely, its defective views concerning the Inspiration of the Word of GOD. And this, be it observed, is no isolated case with which we can afford to deal as if it were a phenomenon so rare as to excite feelings of curiosity, rather than of pain and fear. Sincere as may be the faith reposed on Holy Writ, by many who reject the authority of its witness and keeper, the Church of GOD, the rejection of that authority on any large scale will inevitably involve the rejection of anything like real belief in Inspiration. Ere long perchance, we shall not need to point to Germany for the proof of such assertions. "There are signs of great and growing evil, my lord Archbishop, all about us," said the leading speaker at a recent meeting of great moment, "signs that make us fear that we may have ourselves, before we die, and that our children will almost certainly have to contend for the inspiration and the sacred character of the Word of GOD itself."+ Not dissimilar is the following warning of a voice, alas! no longer with us. * Daniel iii. 44. S. Matt. iii. 2; iv. 17; x. 7. On the only text which at first sight bears a different aspect, (S. Luke xvii. 20, 21,) see Mr. Gladstone's remarks, "Church Principles," chap. iii. p. 101. Compare the parables in the 13th chapter of S. Matthew. + Speech of the Rev. G. A. Denison, at the public meeting of the National Society; June 6, 1849. The sentence immediately following is worthy of all attention. "We shall come but ill-armed to that fight ourselves, and we shall not leave to our children the inheritance of that strength which we have received, if we are deluded into accepting the whole or any part of a system of education, which, however its advocates may describe it, does in fact regard as a matter of only secondary consideration the dogmatic teaching and the apostolic discipline of the Church of England." "Too true, I fear it is in fact,-not only that men ought, if consistent, to proceed from opposing Church doctrine to oppose Scripture, but that the leaven which at present makes the mind oppose Church doctrine, does set it, or will soon set it, against Scripture. I wish to declare what I think will be found really to be the case, viz., that a battle for the Canon of Scripture is but the next step after a battle for the Creed, that the Creed comes first in the assault, that is all; and that if we were not defending the Creed, we should at this moment be defending the Canon. Nay, I would predict as a coming event, that minds are to be unsettled as to what is Scripture and what is not; and I predict it that, as far as the voice of one person in one place can do, I may defeat my own prediction by making it."* And an Edinburgh Reviewer, evidently an acute observer of the times, speaks in like manner of "the doctors of Germany, and those other doctors by whom Oxford is now replacing her AngloCatholic professors of divinity," as "half believing, half rejecting interpreters, who pyrrhonise the sacred writings into a series of mythes."+ Such being the concurrent testimony of minds, who make their observations from very different points of view, it is, we repeat, a question of no slight importance to inquire, whether any theological work, introduced to the notice of our reading public, does or does not tend to foster this scepticising spirit. But before we apply this query to Neander's Life of CHRIST, we must crave the reader's indulgence for a few more general remarks upon this subject of Exegetical Theology. Far be from us to insinuate that there is not a real science of Biblical criticism and exegesis. Its functions are well enumerated in the following words of one, to whom we have just alluded. "Under the science of interpretation is of course included all inquiry into its principles; the question of mystical interpretation, the theory of the double sense, the doctrine of types, the phraseology of prophecy, the drift and aim of the several books of Scripture; the dates when, the places where, and persons by and to whom they were written; the comparison and adjustment of book with book; the uses of the Old Testament; the relevancy of the law to Christians; its relation to the Gospel and the historical fulfilment of prophecy."§ Truly, a fair and luxuriant field, for spirits the most devotional, for intellects the most profound, to roam at large in and rejoice! But a field withal already sown with tares, arising not (un yévoirC) from the original nature of the soil, thrice-blest and watered with * Mr. Newman in the Tracts for the Times, No. 85, page 72. Essays in Ecclesiastical Biography, by the Right Hon. Sir James Stephen, (Vol. ii. p. 145.) We trust to find an early opportunity of examining these remarkable and interesting volumes. Newman. University Sermons, (pp. 260, 1.) He justly adds, that " previous to such inquiries are others still more necessary, such as the study of the original languages in which the Sacred Volume is written." the dews of heaven itself, but implanted by the corrupted hearts of them that walk therein, and by the subtleness of an ever-watchful foe. Biblical interpretation, like all other pursuits in which the intellect is especially engaged, has its own peculiar trials and temptations. There may be doubtless a reverent comparison instituted between the patriarchs, of whom the ALMIGHTY deigned to be called peculiarly the GOD,* and the leaders of nomadic tribes of whom we read in the pages of travellers and secular historians; or between the institutions of Moses and Lycurgus; or between the lyrical form into which so many of the Old Testament prophecies are cast, and the similar forms of the poetry of other nations. Such comparisons properly conducted, may bring out very forcibly the supernatural character of the Sacred Books, and render our impressions of that character far clearer and more marked than heretofore. But let no man, as he values his own soul and the souls of his fellow men, attempt such tasks without the continual remembrance, that he is handling at the same time things of earth, and things essentially divine, (however transmitted through human media ;) that there exists an essential generic difference between the objects of his comparison; and that in any degree to drag down the celestial to the mundane element,† is doing nothing less than derogating from the honour of Him, Who has proclaimed Himself a jealous GOD." And that which is true of one branch of the science of sacred criticism, is equally true with respect to the remaining branches. All need the same devout reverence, all need the same previous indoctrination of the entire cycle of Catholic truth. Now whatever be the view of that deep and difficult subject, the nature of inspiration, which is to be taken up and defended by the Church's champions in this later age, sure we are that it cannot be that which is manifested in the volume now before us. tainly can conceive a highly reverent estimate of the written Word, We cerwhich yet might not wholly accord with the principles on which Mr. Greswell has based his celebrated Harmonia Evangelica. But what ought we to think concerning a theory of Inspiration, which can permit those who hold it to pen such sentences as the following ? 1. "Well may he hesitate who undertakes to write the life of CHRIST! Who, indeed (as Herder finely answered Lavater), could venture, after John, to write the life of CHRIST?"-Preface to first edition. 2. "Here arises the question, whether CHRIST intentionally selected twelve men for this purpose, and took the individuals thus chosen into closer communion with Himself, or whether this intimate relationship Exodus iii. 6. † A fault, we grieve to say, but too conspicuous in Mr. Milman's History of the Jews; and still more revoltingly displayed in Heeren's Manual of Ancient History. arose out of a gradual separation of the more susceptible disciples from the mass, who formed by degrees a narrower and more permanent circle about His person; whether, in a word, the choice of the twelve was made once for all, by a definite purpose, or arose simply from the nature of the case. But there are passages which speak expressly of the choosing of the twelve; and, even without attaching undue weight to these (!), there are other and sufficient grounds for believing that such a choice was actually made."-Page 116. 3. "A favourable light is thrown upon the genuineness and credibility of John's Gospel by the fact that it alone contains a closely connected and chronological account of CHRIST'S public ministry."-Page 158 (Note). 4. "He [the demoniac mentioned in S. Luke viii. 26*] believed himself inhabited and hurried thither and thither by a host of evil spirits. . . . Did CHRIST really† participate in the opinions of the demoniac, or was it only subsequently inferred from the fact that the swine rushed down, that CHRIST had allowed the evil spirits to take possession of them?" -Pp. 192, 193. 5. "A woman who had suffered with an issue for twelve years, and had sought aid in vain from physicians, approached Him through the press from behind. She did not venture to address Him directly, but having formed the idea in her own way, she thought that a sort of magical healing power streamed forth from His person, and that she might be relieved of her malady simply by touching His garment. Her believing confidence, although blended with erroneous conceptions, was not disappointed.... Luke's account could have been given by none but an eye-witness in such lively and minute detail; e. g., CHRIST's question, Peter's answer, the repetition of the question, &c. . . . . Luke's eye-witness had the conception of the mode of cure that the woman herself had, and so interpreted CHRIST's words."-Page 195 (and note). 6. "The Transfiguration may be considered either (1) as an objective fact, a real communication with the world of spirits, or (2) as a subjective psychological phenomenon. The account of Luke bears indubitable marks of originality and historical truth; the attempts that have been made to resolve it into a mythical narrative are absurd. But it certainly appears rather to favour the second view above stated rather than the first (!)" Then after fairly admitting the possibility of such an occurrence as an objective reality, Neander proceeds to argue : "But on the other hand, by following the indications given in Luke, we may arrive at the following view of the narrative: JESUS retired in the evening with three of His dearest disciples apart into a mountain to pray in their presence. We may readily imagine that His prayer referred to the subjects on which He had spoken so largely with the disciples on the preceding days, viz., the coming developement of His kingdom, and the conflicts He was to enter into at Jerusalem in its behalf. They were deeply impressed by His prayer; His countenance *And in the parallel passages of S. Matt. viii. 28; S. Mark v. 1. |