THE ENGLISH PRESBYTERIAN MESSENGER. MARCH, 1866. THE BOOK OF LIFE.* BY THE REV. WILLIAM KENNEDY MOORE, M.A., LIVERPOOL. THE enterprise in which this Society is engaged may be described as a peculiarly Protestant one. This arises from the circumstance that the Scriptures occupy a place of importance with us they cannot have even with other sections of the so-called Christian Church. Neither Romanists, on the one hand, nor Rationalists on the other, attach the super-eminent value that we do to Revelation. With Rationalists the Bible neither has the authority of absolute inspiration, nor its contents the value of unmingled truth. The inspiration they acknowledge differs not in kind, and scarcely in degree, from the genius of poets and philosophers. Christ is but a better Confucius or Zoroaster-if, indeed, he be better at all; and the Christian faith is but a different development of the same ideas in the human mind which have elsewhere produced Sabeanism, or the religion of Boodh. The process to which the Rationalists subject the Scriptures is in their view a separation of the truth which they really contain from the error wherewith it is mingled. Of course it follows that their efforts would be directed to the circulation, not of the unrefined mass, but of the separated metal. The ore of gold is precious, but no man would retain it in that form. The produce of the mine is passed through the crucible, and only after being stamped at the Mint does the gold become current for purposes of The chemist's art extracts the quintessence from valuable products in which is concentrated their whole virtue, while the refuse is thrown away. commerce. And just as no physician would administer the bulky substance when he could prescribe the purer and more potent essence, so no Rationalist would circulate the Scriptures if he could push his own theories, in which, as he imagines, is contained the true worth of the sacred volume. In this case, however, Lord Bacon's dictum applies with singular force, "that distilled books, like distilled waters, are mostly flashy things." The mistake they make is in rejecting the good and keeping the worthless, like the old wife who threw away the tea and ate the leaves; or, perhaps, as what they retain may not be altogether worthless, they are, like Scott's wild. Highlander, who rejected the guinea and craved a lily-white shilling, a specimen of Celtic simplicity which I am afraid no English tourist is fortunate enough to meet with now-a-days. Rationalists would rather see the life of Christ by Strauss or by Renan read by the world, than the life of Christ by Matthew or John. But what would you give for a life of Napoleon which never took the least notice of his battles, or a life of Palmerston which never mentioned the Foreign Office ? The substance of a speech delivered at the Annual Meeting of the Liverpool Auxiliary Bible Society. No. 219.-New Series. 5 And of what use is a Gospel without a Saviour? There seems, indeed, to be no reason at all why Rationalists should care in the least for the Scriptures any more than for the Zendavesta of the Parsees or the Vedas of the Brahmins. The same theories could, with sufficient skill, be extracted from all of them. All the religions in the world these clever men can use as the raw material to yield their favourite system, just as alcohol can be distilled from almost anything. The poetic vine and plain prosaic barley, the rice of Eastern swamps and the refuse of West Indian mills, all serve much the same purpose; and the brandy of France, the whisky of Scotland, the arrack of Java, and the rum of Jamaica, are all much the same thing; and I dare say a man who wished to intoxicate himself would find no great difficulty in accomplishing his end by the use of any of them. And so a man who followed a so-called rational system, might as well style himself a Hindoo or a Boodhist as a Christian. Indeed, I believe these subtle Orientals have been beforehand with our modern philosophers, and that the same fine theories may be found in their books as in the most recent productions of the age, just as spiders in the days of Pharaoh spun the very same cobwebs as spiders now-a-days. The Romanists, on the other hand, could not venture to bring the Scripture openly forward, because it does not really sanction the claims which they pretend to found upon it. An examination of their so-called title would prove that they were impostors; the documents themselves would disprove their construction of the contents. No man who knew there was a flaw in the title-deeds of his property would be willing to have them scrutinized in open court; he would rather keep them in the darkest recess of his most secret closet, where no one knew, safe in a strong box with a patent lock which nobody could open. Of course he would have a fair copy made all right and correct, with no dangerous clauses or suspicious paragraphs, which, you must take his word for it, exactly represents the original. If he were to show the original, he would be put into the same awkward predicament as the negro servant who brought five bottles of wine as a present to a gentleman from his master, with a letter, in which it was stated that six bottles had been sent. When taxed with drinking the other one, the poor bewildered darkie said that he could not understand how the letter could have told tales on him, for he had put it under a stone that it might not see while he made free with the contents of the bottle. of The Roman priests know a trick or two beyond poor Sambo, and take good care to keep the papers out of sight which would disturb their quiet enjoyment of the good things they possess. The difference of the systems in which we and the Romanists endeavour to extend our respective religious views was well stated to me by an ecclesiastic of the Papal Church whom I saw during my sojourn in Italy. He was a very intelligent and interesting man, who expressed his views with considerable frankness. "The mistake you Protestants is," he said, "that you put knowledge before faith; you try to get men to believe by putting the whole truth before them, and appealing to their private judgment. We get them first to put faith in the Church, and then we instruct them in her authorized doctrines. Our system leads to unity and yours to diversity. We are the Catholic Church, you are a bundle of heterogeneous sects." Now this statement of my Italian friend is certainly exceedingly plausible, and assigns the most specious reason for substituting the teaching of the priesthood for the free circulation of the Scriptures. And it is quite true that we instruct men in order that they may believe, but we hold that this is the right and rational way. We do not want a blind faith. If ignorance be the mother of devotion, it can be only devotion of a superstitious kind. We prefer that reasonable service which springs from true enlightenment. The Romish Church leads men by the hand, because they are kept in the dark. We give them the full light, and are confident they will choose the right path, and will walk in it freely, without needing to be led. Nay, we are convinced that where light is denied, it is because the path along which the benighted are led is known by their leaders not to be the true one. As for the accusation that we are a bundle of heterogeneous sects, the fact of this very Society is sufficient to disprove it. Unless we had confidence in each other's views as embodying the true faith of Jesus, could we unite in such an enterprise? The Bible Society is a truly catholic enterprise, an exponent not of Roman but of Protestant catholicity. But, indeed, I do not like that word Protestant. Its origin was in a minor historical event, the protest of the reforming party at the diet of Spires; an event, however, of much greater importance than that which gives its adopted name to an influential movement in recent times, and which arose from the advocacy by a stammering speaker of the cause of tee-te-tee-teetotal abstinence. But apart from its connection with a German diet, the name is but a party name. It brings out our antagonism to the Papal Church, but does not properly describe us. It is a negative, not a positive, epithet; and since things are much better understood by knowing what they are than what they are not, I should rather say that the Bible Society is an exponent of true Christian catholicity. We are all agreed in the main as to what the Bible teaches, and as to the points in which we differ; we are confident that the better the teaching of the Bible comes to be understood, the less room will there be for difference. True it is that the circulation of the Scriptures is only half of what must be done. As there is a word to be taught, so must there be men to teach it. Not only is good seed required, but the sower must go forth to sow that seed ere there can be hope of abundant harvest. We have Christian pastors at home, and we must have missionaries abroad, in the appointment of whom denominational influences must come into play; yet it is pleasant to think what catholicity of spirit there is in the missionfield, where brethren of every name show themselves brethren indeed in hearty affection and cordial co-operation. And in the matter of forwarding the Scriptures, we ourselves here at home may show ourselves of one mind, and work with united spirit in the same good cause. As the Bible spreads through every corner of the globe, it will make the Church more catholic in the sense of making it more universal. The word of life will furnish the strongest uniting link by making us possessors of a common heritage. It is pleasant to feel our kindred with other men. Wherever in your travels you meet an English gentleman, you know at once what a store of things you have in common. You are both admirers of constitutional liberty; you have both read and appreciated Shakspeare; you ought both to be lovers of fair play; perhaps you both believe in cricket and roast beef-and these things produce a bond of sympathy between you. There are wider circles of brotherhood also. Wherever you find a man of education, you discover a community of sentiment arising from your common familiarity with the great masterpieces of human genius. Be he Russian, German, or Spaniard, he has like you been kindled into enthusiasm by the fire of Homer's mighty line, or been taken by the sweetness of Virgil's flowing numbers. He has triumphed in spirit at Marathon, and mourned at the death of Socrates. One great advantage of a thorough education is, that it produces this community of sentiment, and thus tends to hold together in kindly bonds men who otherwise greatly differ. There is something noble in the spectacle of brotherhood of minds under all diversities of race, country, and language. I am not surprised, therefore, that Romanist writers should dwell with such complacence on the idea of their widely extended church with its changeless ritual. Wherever you enter a place of Papal worship, in America or Australia, in the valleys of Peru or at the borders of Japan, you will see the same smybols of faith, and hear the same words of consecration. The spectacle would be imposing, I confess, were it not that this universality is so dead and barren a thing. I care not for the catholicity that finds its acme in the minutiae of an idle ceremony, or the language of an empty formula. But, on the other hand, I rejoice at every advance that is made in true catholicity of spirit, a brotherhood of hearts under every diversity of outward circumstances, a unity of faith, of affection, and of love in the Lord Jesus. Is not this an enterprise which should commend itself greatly to you? Should not your very humanity lead you to aid so good a cause? Wherever the Bible comes it brings blessings in its train. In its wake follow civilization, peace, and progress; it is the great healing power for the ills of man, the great panacea for his social short-comings. We English are said to be a conservative people; well, here we have the great conservative power, that which preserves the life and vigour of nations, and the purity and welfare of society. True conservatism does not consist always in letting things alone, but in preserving their excellence. To take a very humble illustration, it would not be conservatism to allow meat to rot, but to cure it with salt. The man who said, "Let it alone," would be the really destructive man; and he who applied the antiseptic agent would be the true conservative. If you think this illustration too homely a one, remember that I take it from the Bible. "Ye are the salt of the earth; "these are our Saviour's own words. Society tends, if left to itself, to a kind of rottenness and dissolution. Civilization produces its peculiar vices, and these, like sores, prey upon the body politic and eat out all its vigour. Now is it not the part of wisdom to apply the remedy which alone can cure? If you were seized with any bodily distemper, you would not say, "Let it alone." It may be very well to let things remain as they are when they go right, but when evils prevail, the sooner they are corrected the better. In our own land, unfortunately, sin produces an amount of loss and misery which is absolutely appalling. Yet society is in a more wholesome condition here than almost anywhere in the world. And when the good leaven permeates the whole mass of the community, those gin-palaces will no more send their flare, that gigantic workhouse will be left nearly empty, and that gallows will be no more in requisition. Yet we need not wait till all this is accomplished before we cast the healing salt into the bitter waters that carry barrenness and death over heathen lands. The more we seek to water them with the streams of life, the more shall we ourselves be watered from its beneficent channels. I have talked of the Bible as the great conservative power. Perhaps the sound of that word may be less agreeable to some of your ears. You like the liberal watchword; you are all for progress and improvement. Well, the Bible is the law of liberty, and breathes the very spirit of advance. Nor is this inconsistent with what we said before. As extremes meet in all forms of error and evil, so every good thing is akin to everything else truly good. The conservatism I believe in, is the conservatism of progress; that of England, not that of China. We all agree, I am sure, with our Laureate when he says: "Onward, onward let us range; Let the great world sweep for ever down the ringing groove of change. Progress is the watchword of humanity. Our faith, like our nature, summons us to perfection. Christian conservatism does not cripple growth, but aids its full development. It is not the torturing iron slipper, that confines the Chinese lady's foot, but the framework of the living head that suits itself to the enlarging brain. The Bible, indeed, has swept away old usages, but they were the dead branches that needed to be cut off. It has brought in new laws and customs, but only because they were required. It has removed nothing because it was old, but because it was evil. It has brought in nothing because it was new, but because it was good. It has led, indeed, to conflicts, and may lead to many more, but these arise from its expanding life, which cannot be held down by strait and narrow bonds. Under India's fervent sun a tree has been seen which has rooted itself in the wall of an abandoned temple. As the tree grew great and strong, the stones by which it was confined were gradually moved, till at last the wall was split and thrown down to the ground. Here we have a symbol of what must take place where the Word of Life is firmly rooted and finds its full development. Every restraining system of heathenism or tyranny must be brought down to the dust that the Tree of Life may spread abroad the branches of its blessing. Life! yes; it is that the Bible gives-life in its best and highest sense. There is a kind of vital power in all the works of genius. Artists visiting Italian galleries are inspired, as it were, with a new glow and ardour of invention. The discovery of some choice ancient statues led to a new era of splendid sculpture. When Europe, in the sixteenth century, returned to the study of classic writers, the revival of literature took place. All the choice products of the gifted human soul have not only a perennial charm, but a strange power of kindling a new life in art or speculation. But the Book of God stands apart from all these as high above them as heaven is high above the earth, as much more precious in its effects as eternity is more than time. It was an old old book long before Englaud became mistress of the seas; yea, long before the English people began to be. The great empires of the world have waxed old, but the Bible is fresh with immortal youth. Ancient as the pyramids, it has not been like them a dead and empty thing, but rather, like the mighty sun of day, its light and warmth have been the life and joy of successive generations, and will continue so to be till time shall be no more. In this world of vicissitudes, the Bible alone seems changeless amidst the ruins of time and history. It knows no decay. How true that word of the ancient prophet, "The voice said, Cry. And he said, What shall I cry? All flesh is grass, and all the goodliness thereof is as the flower of the field: grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever." The great and mighty perish from among us; the wise and noble are taken away; "the potent voice in parliament" is stilled. the The We all fade as a leaf, but the word of the Lord endureth for ever. life it kindles in the heart is a Divine spark that shall never be extinguished. Beyond this world of death is the world of life eternal. Blessed they who |