mena that are of daily occurrence! The partial suspension of mental and bodily functions during Sleep, the effects of opium and other drugs, on both body and mind; the influence again exercised by volition, and by various mental emotions, on the muscles, and on other parts of the bodily frame, and many other of these phenomena, have exercised for ages the ingenuity of the ablest men to find even any approximation towards but an imperfect explanation of them. Yet the evidence on which we believe in the reality of these and of many other things no less dimly and partially understood, is perfect.

On the other hand, the characters, transactions, &c. represented by dramatic writers, or described by historians, are often as clearly intelligible as it is possible for any thing to be; yet from the total want of evidence, or from the want of clear and decisive evidence, as to their reality, we regard them as either entire fictions, or mixtures of fable and truth, or as more or less likely to have actually existed." The character and conduct of Lear, for instance, or Othello, of Hamlet, and Macbeth, are perfectly intelligible; though it is very doubtful how far the tales which suggested to

a See Rhetoric, part i. c. 2, § 2, "On the plausible and the historically probable."

Shakspeare the idea of most of his dramas had any foundation in fact, or were originally fictitious. Many again of the Orations recorded by the ancient Greek and Roman historians are as easily and plainly to be understood as any that are reported in our own times; but in what degree each of these is a faithful record of what was actually spoken, is a point on which we have, in some cases, a slight and imperfect evidence; and in others, none that deserves the name.

Fallacies resorted to

subjects.

§ 41. In all subjects where religion on religious is not concerned, no one of ordinary good sense ever confounds together two things so dissimilar and unconnected as those I have been speaking of. But in what pertains to religion, the fallacy is, as I have said, often introduced. Yet Religion does not, in this respect, really differ from other subjects.

Our Saviour's character and his teaching were matter of wondering perplexity to all around Him; even in a far greater degree than after the establishment of his Kingdom, on his personal ministry being completed; both because the Jews were full of the expectation of a totally different kind of Deliverer, and because great part of his discourses were not even designed to be fully intelligible, at the

time, to his own disciples; but to be explained afterwards by the occurrence of the events He alluded to. Some of his followers, accordingly, "went back and walked no more with Him," on the occasion of one of these discourses. But the Apostles, who adhered to Him, did so, neither from having any clearer notions concerning his revelations, (for we often find it recorded that "they understood not this saying," &c.) nor again, from being satisfied to believe without any clear proof of his high pretensions; but because they "believed, and were sure that He was the Christ, the Son of the living God," on such evidence as He had Himself appealed to: "the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me." Dim, and indistinct, and imperfect as were still their notions (as to a great degree, ours must be also) concerning "the Son of God," it was no indistinct or imperfect evidence on which they believed that He was so.

A converse case is that of the several false Christs who afterwards arose. "I am come," says our Lord, "in my Father's name," (with such manifestations of divine power as testified his coming from God) "and ye receive me not; if another shall come in his own name," (viz. requiring acceptance on his own bare word, without any miraculous credentials) "him ye

20

will receive." Their teaching, their pretensions, and promises, were as clearly intelligible to the greater part of the Jews-because falling in with the prevailing belief and expectations, as those of Jesus had been (even to his own disciples) obscure, perplexing, or unintelligible. Accordingly, vast multitudes followed these pretenders, without requiring any clear and sufficient evidence of the truth of their pretensions: and they followed them to their own and their Country's ruin.

The very history of our own religion, therefore, supplies us here with an illustration of the distinction I have been speaking of. On the one side we have a revelation, itself dimly and partially understood, and doubtful, in great part, as to its meaning, but with clear evidence that it really came from God: on the other, a pretended revelation, containing, to those it was proposed to, no doubts or difficulties as to its sense and its design, but supported by no evidence that could satisfy an unprejudiced mind, bent on the attainment of truth.

False views

of what is

$42. However plausible then the faith. system I have been objecting to may appear to any one, however imposing and mysteriously sublime, however gratifying and

b See Sermon on the "Name Emmanuel :" and also Cruden's Concordance on the word "Name."

consolatory to the feelings-let him not therefore neglect to inquire for the proofs by which its high pretensions are to be sustained; but rather examine with the more care the foundation on which so vast a superstructure is made to rest. Let no one be deterred from this by fierce denunciations against the presumptuousness of all inquiry, and all use of private judgment in religious matters; and by eulogies on the virtue of faith; remembering that the "faith" thus recommended is precisely that want of faith for which those Jews just mentioned were so severely condemned. They refused to listen to good evidence, and assented to that which was worthless.

misdirected

And let no one allow himself to be Danger of persuaded that he is evincing an hum- piety. ble piety, acceptable to the "jealous God,” in hastily giving credence to the pretensions to divine authority put forth in behalf of uninspired men, (not producing the miraculous "Signs of an Apostle") by those who are for blending "Tradition with Scripture," and "following the dictates of inspiration wherever found, whether in Scripture or Antiquity ;" and who pronounce according to their own arbitrary choice, what are, and what are not, the general Councils whose "deliberations were overruled by the Holy Spirit and their decrees consequently authoritative."