Is he converted from selfishness, unrighteousness, and lust, from blindness to the spiritual world, and disregard of God? Is he sincere and upright, faithful and devout? Does he love God and man? Is holiness his supreme desire and aim? Then in him are the beginnings of salvation; and from these we may discern what he shall hereafter become.

Now, if thus saved, it is, in Bible language, 'through faith,' which has brought him into contact with those mighty forces that have transformed his character and life. But again we must be accurate in the use of language. It is not 'for faith,' as seems often loosely to be understood; as though faith were either a meritorious work, or an arbitrary condition of acceptance with God. Still less is it 'for' or 'on account of' his belief. Belief is valuable only as the answer of the intellect to the Faith that attaches the soul to Christ, and so affects the whole spiritual nature. Nay, we may point to cases not a few, where that answer is but feeble or mistaken. The man clings to the Saviour, but so clings amid the darkness. Interrogate him theologically; he can give no definite reply; or if he attempt one, it is such a

reply as you must needs condemn.

may be erroneous, but the trust is real.

The Creed

Yet it is important that a definite reply should be given. A mistaken belief must be, in one way or another, and sooner or later, an injury to faith; and unbelief condemns because it renders faith impossible, and so seals the separation of the soul from God.

Here are two sides of the same great truth, both worthy to be specially noted because of their frequent exaggeration and perversion. Undoubtedly there are two prevailing tendencies of thought, opposite to each other, but equally tending to misapprehension.

First, It has always been the disposition of theologians to attribute to belief, in itself considered, a moral character; so that every error, in all circumstances, is a sin. Hence many an olden creed thick-sown with anathemas; hence also the appalling series of religious persecutions, carried on in many cases by men devoutly in earnest, and as far as possible from being naturally cruel. These things belong to the history of the past, yet the spirit that prompted them lurks among us still. Often quoted is the text, doubtful

་

in itself, and made more terrible in its translation: He that believeth not shall be damned.' These words, whether spoken by our Lord or not, have been so misapplied by ecclesiastics as to sustain the impression that mistaken views of religion are necessarily and essentially criminal. So easy has it been to read the text as though the words' He that believeth not' meant' He that believeth amiss,' that is, 'He who does not interpret Scripture as I do,' or 'as the Church enjoins.' The impression has enstamped itself upon our very language. The word miscreant, etymologically, is simply 'misbeliever'; but (perhaps owing to the associations of the Crusades) it has long come to mean a criminal of the very vilest class. So, even now, it is not uncommon to hear such epithets of condemnation hurled at the erroneous convictions of sincere men as ought to be reserved for the deepest moral obliquity.

This is one mistake; but I apprehend that in our own day there is far more danger of falling into the opposite extreme, and of forgetting that there is a distinctly traceable connection between

1 Mark xvi. 16. See marginal note, R. V., and all critical editions of the Greek Testament. On the other hand, consult Dean Burgon's The Last Twelve Verses of St. Mark's Gospel.

creed and character.

Dr. Pusey writes in one of

his letters that 'to maintain that "it is of no importance what we believe," and that "one creed is as good as another," is the central heresy of our day.' Without going so far as this, we may still recognise that the spirit is abroad, expressed by Pope more than a century and a half ago:

For modes of faith let graceless zealots fight;

He can't be wrong whose life is in the right.1

Belief, it is said, in the last resort, is founded upon evidence. Define it as the acceptance of the testimony of God; it is still a question of evidence whether the testimony be really His or not; and the purely intellectual process by which this question is to be solved cannot have any moral quality. The process, we may reply, is not 'purely intellectual.' Its validity presupposes certain conditions-that the inquirer be honest, that the evidence be candidly and seriously weighed, that the desire to arrive at the truth be simple and sincere. These conditions are in many cases notoriously lacking. Some take up their opinions indolently, without any sense of

1 Essay on Man, III. 305, 306.

responsibility

or correspondingly earnest endeavour; often, again, the judgment is warped by passion, inclination, self-interest; and the will, biassed by pride, cowardice, or ambition, becomes a powerful factor in determining the conclusion. The Apostle Paul speaks of men who refused, or literally 'did not approve1 to have God in their knowledge.' So the affirmation: 'He can't be wrong whose life is in the right' is either the most barren of truisms, or else an impressive warning. A truism, if by 'life' we are to understand the inward principles of a man as well as the outward conduct. Let these principles be ' in the right,' and the conduct be framed in accordance with them; then the man, of course, 'cannot be wrong.' But, if any more than this be intended, the words become a direct warning to see that the life be pure, in order that the faith may be pure also. I think our Lord intended something very like this by His profound saying: 'If any man willeth to do the will of God, he shall know of the teaching.' It is a test that one must apply cautiously to others, severely to oneself. Our belief, it may be, is a sure though 2 John vii. 17.

1 Rom. i. 28 ; οὐκ ἐδοκίμασαν.

2