set down as the hothouse plants of a diseased and over-excited heart. He shews that our circumstances very much prevent our feeling as the apostles necessarily and justly felt :

"Even the miracles of the Gospel affect us very faintly in comparison of the deep and awful impression which they must have made on the apostles and their first converts. With us they are the objects of reason and reflection. With them they were the objects of sense and sight, the constant subject of astonishment and praise. Can we wonder, then, if the apostle speaks of the Gospel, its evidence, its doctrines, and its effects, with a warmth and vehemence which, however it may exceed the religious zeal which such subjects now excite, is really no more than what their exalted nature and their stupendous importance deserved? No; he only speaks the language of nature and truth when he describes the change wrought in the conduct and hopes of himself and every convert, by receiving the Gospel, in the most bold and glowing terms, when he calls it passing from slavery to freedom, from sin to righteousness, from death to life, a total change of vital principleseven a new creation. Having established the resurrection of Christ by the fullest proofs, and thence inferred the certainty of a general resurrection and the power of Christ to pardon the penitent, how natural and just that bold apostrophe, 'O Death, where is thy sting! O Grave, where is thy victory!""

In the interesting and Christian memoir drawn up by his son, we find the Dean was perplexed as to the course he ought to pursue with reference to the Bible Society. On the one hand he felt that, if he refused to join it, the Romish priests would soon find a pretext for accusing him and his friends of real though disguised hostility to the free circulation of the sacred Scriptures; on the other hand, he saw that many Churchmen, who were jealous of his fame, and pretended to undervalue his fervour, would attribute to him a partiality for dissenterism. It was neither of these imputations, however, that induced him to withdraw. He was intensely interested in the welfare of the divinity students intrusted to his care, and afraid that either might prejudice their minds or frustrate his professional usefulness among them. He, therefore, under all the circumstances of the

case, deemed it advisable to withdraw from the association, as he explains himself in the following letter to the archbishop:

"I have maturely considered the subject of the last conversation with which your grace honoured me. Zealously devoted as I have ever been to the established church, from an unfeigned couviction of its Scriptural character, if my continuance in the Bible Society can excite the slightest suspicion of my being favourable to dissenterism, I cannot hesitate to withdraw from it. I am determined while I live to maintain the cause of the Church of England. I am only anxious that the clergymen withdrawing from the Bible Society should not afford any reason to suspect that they would neglect or oppose a judicious and effective distribution of the Scriptures in Ireland."

The question of the Bible Society is at this moment exciting considerable attention. The Baptists, we believe, secede from it, because they object most frivolously to certain translations. Another portion, consisting of those clergy who hold Tractarian views, object to it because of its non-ecclesiastical institution. A third section secede on account of its refusing to begin their meetings with prayer. We suppose the result will be that the present British and Foreign Bible Society will be restricted very much to the Dissenters, and the Establishment have its own Church Bible Society. If this will produce greater good, lull the dissensions and divisions which are cherished on points comparatively subordinate, and in any shape these parties "provoke one another to good works," no material mischief will ensue. It is only to be desired, as Dean Graves observes, that it be not supposed, by neutral or hostile parties, that those who feel it their duty to walk asunder are against the free and unrestricted circulation of the Scriptures.

As the minister of St. Mary's Church, the Dean presented a model which many would do well to imitate. He was not merely the popular preacher, but the laborious pastor-visiting from house to house. It is, in fact, this aggressive character in the clergy that tells wonderfully on the habits of our population. The poor feel raised in the scale of rational and Christian relationship,

not merely by the tidings of the gospel, but the practical illustration of it. They feel, by being visited in their lowly dwellings, that they are of worth, and are felt and appreciated as immortal men. Were our parochial cures less extensive, or rather were church extension fairly followed out and vigorously followed up, much of the moral evil which at present afflicts society would disappear. We are so pleased with the following letter of the Dean to his parishioners, that we give it entire :

"Dean Graves is induced by present circumstances to take this mode of expressing to the Protestant parishioners of St. Mary's, his sincere wish to cultivate with them that private and pastoral intercourse which a clergyman, anxious for the religious concerns of those who are intrusted to his care, ought affectionately to maintain.

"He has hitherto reposed with wellfounded confidence on the zeal and exertions of the two exemplary clergymen in whose care he was so fortunate as to find the parish placed; but the sudden indisposition of both these valuable assistants at once has impressed him with a strong sense of his own responsibility for the effective discharge of the pastoral duty, and impelled him in person to assure his respected Christian friends (amongst whom he ranks the family on whom he has now the pleasure to call), that he will always be ready, when they express a wish to that effect, to visit them in sickness or sorrow, and by any means in his power to assist in promoting personal and family religion, whenever his assistance is desired and he is able to give it. And he trusts that, on the next two Sabbaths appropriated by our apostolic church to the celebration of the holy communion, to which, as their pastor, he would earnestly invite all his Christian friends, a full and devout attendance on that sacred ordinance will shew that they do not disapprove or disregard this respectful and serious application of their faithful and affectionate friend and pastor,


But the ablest production of Dean Graves, and that which, as we have already said, has conferred on his name its chief reputation, is his Lectures on the Pentateuch. This work has become a standard in every clergyman's library. For this vigorous and learned analysis of the authenticity, excellence, and moral beauty of the Pentateuch, we are in VOL. XXIV. NO. CXXXIX.

one sense indebted to the malignant but ignorant attacks of infidelity. Paine, in that evil but silly and shallow book called The Age of Reason, had revived every exploded and repelled objection; and the admirers of his principles, because the lovers of his practices in this country at that time, disseminated his wretched sophistries to a great extent among that class in the community which was least likely to be able to unravel and reject the infidel charges. Numerous able and effective replies were given. The most prominent extinguisher of Paine was Bishop Watson, in his well-known Apology for the Bible. The Dean saw that a complete refutation had been given to all the blasphemer's assaults, and resolved to pass by his objections, and, by a broad and ample excursus, shew the solid foundation on which the whole Pentateuch reposes, and the divine original which its contents indicate. The advantages of the position occupied by the Dean are immense. Paine and other infidels searched out those portions only that could by any ingenuity be twisted to their particular purposes, and Watson and others in meeting them merely neutralised their objections, and, by the very necessity of such a warfare, they were precluded from adducing and fastening on those clear and overwhelming proofs of inspiration, from which the sceptic keeps at the greatest possible distance. The Dean was not thus shackled, and therefore his treatise stands forth the more triumphant. He leaves the external evidence in the hands of others, who have ably discussed it, and concentrates his fine mind on the internal chiefly. On the external evidence JOSEPHUS, both personally and by reference to other writers, furnishes much valuable illustration. EUSEBIUS, in his Evangelical Preparation, also adduces varied and valuable proofs. STILLINGFLEET has shewn, in his Origines Sacræ, the thorough coincidence that subsists between the Scripture dates and those of heathen nations; and the absolute necessity of appealing to the Pentateuch for the only rational and philosophic account of the creation, origin of sin, &c. GALE has shewn, by the most extensive induction, that all the literature of the Gentiles, philosophic and


philologic, may be traced up to the Scriptures and the Jewish church. Grotius, Le Clerc, Faber, Sir William Jones, and other eminent names, have thrown much light on the external branch.

We think the sacred part of the Dean's disquisition peculiarly valuable. He shews the source and progress of idolatry by a historical induction. The immediate descendants of Noah felt the sublime and spiritual worship of their fathers too pure for their sensual practices. They, therefore, turned their minds to something palpable. They felt the sweet influences of sun, moon, and stars; and, in the first instance, believed that in adoring these, they adored the one supreme God that created them. This principle, once introduced, led them to see gods in the winds, in the fire, in the deep; and at last the air, the ocean, and the earth, were peopled with the fantastic gods of the human fancy; and "professing themselves to be wise, they became fools." No ordinary means seemed adequate to the repression of that idolatry which came in like a flood. A supernatural confusion of language broke up the attempt to render this idolatry fixed and permanent, and a supernatural election chose Abraham as the patriarch of one nation among many along the line of whose descendants a right creed and a holy worship were to be transmitted. Accordingly, the earliest lesson taught the patriarchs and impressed upon the minds of their nomad descendants was, "The Lord our God is one God."

The sublime namе JEHOVAH, or "I am that I am," assumed by the God of Abraham, arrested the admiration of heathen philosophers, and stands still alone the combination of the purest faith and the sublimest philosophy. This conception, or rather possession, of one God so described, is a most overwhelming presumption that it was a supernal revelation.

The comparison instituted by our author between the wretched morality of the Gentiles and the pure and spiritual ethics of the Hebrews, furnishes another strong proof that it was a direct emanation from God. In Sparta theft was honourable, if cleverly done. Crimes revolting and

unutterable stain the names of those lands which are constantly set before us as models of social refinement. Nor were such crimes isolated acts, and perpetrated by individuals for whom legislation cannot be made responsible; the crimes found shelter under the laws of great legislators, and in the schools of illustrious philosophers. Compare with these the ennobling morality of the Jews; and may we not ask how it comes to pass, that the countries which originated and carried to perfection the fine arts were so utterly eclipsed in the definitions and principles of morality by a people almost utter strangers to sculpture, painting, and the arts? The Jews were companions for barbarians in every department of the belles lettres, but meet for the fellowship of angels in their knowledge of every principle of morality, both in relation to God and man. There is no accounting for this on any other hypothesis than the true one. Moses received the decalogue from Him of whose essential holiness it is a transcript.

In the moral law of the Hebrews every ceremony is vapid, unless accompanied with clean hands, and subservient to a great and spiritual truth; every sacrifice abomination, unless accompanied with repentance and restitution; every fast and rite unacceptable to God, unless they who were most pre-eminent in both dealt their bread to the hungry, clothed the naked, and relieved the widow and the orphan.

"From all this," observes Dr. Graves, "I derive another presumptive argument for the divine authority of the Mosaic code; and I contend that a moral system thus perfect, promulgated at so early a period to such a people, and enforced by such sanctions as no human power could undertake to execute, strongly bespeaks a divine original."

The Dean enters on the objection that has sometimes been adduced against the divine origin of the Pentateuch, that it was a system restricted to one nation only, and that one of the least of the nations of the earth. This, it is contended, shews an arrangement unworthy of the God of all the families of the earth — a narrow and sectarian scheme. This objection is not of great weight. Every miracle, every demonstration of a divine power, operated on the

[merged small][ocr errors]

minds of those nations among whom they were cast as chastisement to themselves, but in mercy to the heathen. The Egyptians felt and acknowledged the power and supremacy of Jehovah; and some were no doubt converted to the worship of the true God when they surrendered to Joshua, and became "hewers of wood and drawers of water." The Philis

tines must have learned some high spiritual lessons from the wonders which occurred in connexion with the ark, and the judgments of which it was the symbol and the instrument of dealing against their god Dagon. Under the reign of Solomon, the Queen of Sheba, and other remote idolaters, received useful lessons. In Babylon the long captivity was eminently useful to the despot and inhabitants of that haughty capital. Nebuchadnezzar himself passed a decrce after beholding the miraculous preservation of the Hebrew youths :

"I (King Nebuchadnezzar) make a decree, That every people, nation, and language, which speak any thing amiss against the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego, shall be cut in pieces, and their houses shall be made a dunghill; because there is no other god that can deliver after this sort."

A remarkable instance of the carly dissemination of the truths of the unity and spirituality of the Godhead is presented in the case of the Magian or ancient Persian faith. After successive corruptions and reformations, this ancient system was at last more thoroughly reformed by Zoroaster, supposed to have been a contemporary of Daniel. Hyde, in his Religio Veterum Persarum, has the following observations on this subject :

"The books of Zoroaster are almost strangers in Europe (unless, perhaps, they lie somewhere unknown); but some of them relating to theology (that I may not appear to have made these assertions without evidence) are in my possession, written in an ancient language and character. I procured them from the East by great labour and expense; and they are, indeed, precious as gold. It were to be wished that all the works of Zoroaster were drawn out of the darkness of the Magians, and brought to light amongst us; from which, undoubtedly, many things which are now unknown to the European world would be discovered to the advantage of the learned and inquisitive. Zoroaster, from his conversa

tion with the captive Jews in Persia, was well acquainted with the Old Testament, and many rites were from thence introduced by him among the Persians, as appears as well from the history of the creation and other things agreeing with Judaism, as from having inserted many passages of David's writings into his books, his having uttered prophecies concerning the Messiah, foretold and revealed, though with some obscurity, in the Old Testament. But it was besides necessary that himself should have been favoured with a clearer, a more peculiar revelation, and have left that written in his books for the Magi, who were to be led by a star to Christ, when born in Judea, since otherwise they could not have known that, nor would they have come to Judea from a distant land. For these strangers understood this matter better than the inhabitants of Bethlehem, or the king, or all the Jews who were at once instructed and alarmed by this evangelical information of the Magi. All which circumstances persuade us that Zoroaster had a really divine revelation in this particular."

On these words, which indicate so clearly a transmission of sacred knowledge from the Jews to the Magi, the Dean remarks:

"On this last argument of Hyde I would observe, that if Zoroaster was acquainted with the prophetic writings, and communicated to his countrymen the certain expectations of a Messiah, which he had from thence derived, in whom all the nations of the earth were to he blessed,' it is altogether unnecessary to suppose that he was favoured with any additional revelation. But the fact of the visit of the Magi, which otherwise seems unconnected with the other parts of the Scripture history and difficult to account for, is so naturally explained by the supposition, that Providence had extended to the Persians the knowledge of the prophetic writings; and in connexion with that dispensation which had selected their nation out of which to raise for his chosen people a temporal deliverance from the Babylonish captivity, and a restorer of that temple where the Messiah was to appear, had (as it were in return) provided means for preparing them to receive the first tidings of that great spiritual deliverer who was to admit them and all nations into the church of God. This supposition seems to me to explain so clearly the visit of the Magi, and to combine this otherwise isolated fact with the entire series of the divine dispensations, that I confess it gives additional credibility to the fact that this knowledge of the prophecies respecting

the Messiah had been communicated to the Persians either through Zoroaster or some other medium."

In fact, many of the principal moral and historical facts of the Old Testament church and history are recorded in the writings of Zoroaster. We need not prove that Mahomet borrowed whatever of pure morality and just conceptions of Deity are in the Koran from the Old Testament Scriptures. Greece, Italy, Assyria, and Egypt, derived their purest light from Judea. It is true the " light shined in darkness, and the darkness comprehended it not ;" but this only demonstrates the necessity and wisdom of hedging in a peculiar nation by continuous miracles and mercies, and the superintendence of a theocracy. The nations saw, and heard, and felt every moral, intellectual, and miraculous motive; and the fact that they sank deeper into idolatry only proves that no corner of the earth had been bright, if an especial and unccasing miracle had not kept it so. To have put all the nations of the carth under this supernatural administration, would an utter alteration of the whole scheme of God's moral government and the entire subversion of the established course of nature.

Let it also be distinctly borne in mind that the whole Jewish dispensation was preparatory to that more glorious and universal scheme under which it it is our privilege to live. It ultimately unfolded this, when out of its darkest night the Sun of Righteousness arose never again to set.

The Dean directs his attention at the close of his able and dispassionate work, to a consideration of the present state and future prospects of the Jews; and gathers from all that even in his day began to befall that remarkable race clearer and more conclusive proofs of the inspiration of the Old Testament Scriptures. At the conclusion of his defence the Dean meets some of the more prominent objections. These are chiefly of a historical character. Instead of copying them, we may in prosecution of our author's vindication of the Pentateuch, refer as briefly as possible to some objections of a moral kind, which have been liberally adduced against the claims of that ancient work to be the word of God.

Many infidels have said of the curse pronounced upon the Serpent, "Does it not seem a kind of paltry revenge on the part of God to have cursed the Serpent when he pronounced a curse upon guilty man?" A simple reply to this is, Do we not find the very same thing occur in creation and Providence? The objection of the infidel is, that it was wrong in God to make the creature suffer in consequence of the guilty man; but if this be an argument against the God of revelation, it will tell with equal strength against the God of creation. For, suppose an incendiary set fire to a stable, and ten or twenty horses are destroyed, does not the very same apparent injustice occur? Or if a war begins between two nations, and the noble horse is destroyed in battle, do we not see the brutes there suffering in consequence of man's passion and revenge? If, then, it be an argument against the Pentateuch being a revelation from God, that it states the brutes to have been sentenced to suffer in consequence of man's guilt, it must be an argument against the creation being the work of God that you find animals there suffering in consequence of the same guilt.

It is objected that human passions are in Scripture ascribed to God; as, for instance, jealousy, hatred, anger, repentance, and such like. Our reply to this is, that most truths in the word of God are conveyed in figurative language. Heaven is set forth by a glorious land, and a beauteous temple its access,-by gates of pearl in bliss,-by fruits that grow and streams that roll, harps that sound, and minstrels that play upon them. All this every one understands to be figurative language, needful to convey to man some idea of the exalted glory and felicity of that better land. In the same way God represents himself to man under the figures or symbols of human passions, not that man may believe God to be like himself, a creature liable to anger and to change, but that man may have a clearer conception of God's feelings towards injustice and crime. Hence, when it is said that God is angry with the sinner, it simply denotes that He disapproves of sin. When it is said that God is jealous, it simply denotes that he will

« ElőzőTovább »