by the aid of the "Christian consciousness of the age," the theology of which it must reflect, the authority must lie in the age, not in the Word of God; which is thus made quite subservient to it. The reason which is assigned for this rejection of Scripture as a ground of appeal, is the differences amongst interpreters, which are unnecessarily magnified, without any attempt to account for their discrepancies. Now granting that these differences were greater than they are represented to be, are we to infer is it logical to infer that we must call in another authority to put a meaning upon what is admitted to be the Word of God. And who is to give the meaning? for Scripture interpretation, in its highest sense, namely, collation of passages, being inductive, is impossible, absurd? Why, the very parties it is meant to instruct―nay, the very parties it condemns-for to confine ourselves to the consciousness of the true disciple, would be the establishment of an authority inconsistent with liberty, an imperium in imperio quite incompatible with the theory. Strange arrangement!-the child is to instruct its teacher-the criminal to put his own construction on the sentence of the judge. "The whole world (saith the Word) lieth in the wicked one. What meaning would the "moral consciousness" give to this?

Give reason a power beyond that of weighing the evidences for the genuineness of Scripture as a message from God, and to search what the meaning of that message is, without daring to force its own construction on a single passage, or presuming to reject a single revealed truth, and we shall soon have the whole order of Divine revelation subverted, and a religion, not of God, but of man, based on the corruption of that nature it was designed to renew.

Would our author bring commentators to draw their theology from Scripture, with a small share even of that preparation which he tells us is absolutely necessary for the application of his own criterion-"a mind entirely free from bias and prejudice"-along with "great research,"-by the aid of that Divine assistant, promised to those who have the former of these qualifications, we should soon have a unanimous Church. And even as it is, with all the diversities caused by a perverted nature, we would direct Mr Morell's attention to that standing evidence of unanimity in the churches of Christ, the "harmony of Protestant Confessions."

We have now passed in review some of the most important points on which these lectures touch, after examining the foundation on which their author's views mainly rest, in as calm a spirit as we are able, and if the spirit of our latter remarks should be felt to be too severe, our only excuse is, the difficulty

of calmly dealing with the consequences of a system so pernicious in their bearing on much-loved truths; and we would remind such as may feel aggrieved, that we have confined ourselves to such points as the author formally or virtually acknowledges.

And in conclusion, we would direct Mr Morell's attention to two great truths, by the practical (although theoretically admitted) neglect of which, he has greatly vitiated his past productions, and will not only vitiate his future ones, (for we expect many,) but do incalculable injury to religion and morals. These truths are, the depravity of human nature on the one hand, and the work of the Holy Spirit on the other.

Had they been kept prominently in mind, we would not have heard so much of man's "divine intuitions" or his "religious consciousness," nor have met with such views regarding the discovery of religious truth, or Scripture interpretation, nor even such misconceptions of the office assigned by Protestants to the indidual reason.

In any system of Mental Philosophy, the neglect of those elements is injurious; but their being overlooked in ethical researches is specially pernicious, and must be false. We do not mean to say that a full religious acquaintance with these doctrines is absolutely necessary, for they are often taken into account by accurate observers, as facts which require to be included in their summation of mental phenomena. But they are much more frequently overlooked, even by those who do not formally deny them.

We can easily see how greatly a theory of practical mechanics would fail, however beautiful it might look in the abstract, if the effects of friction were not included; or a scientific account of the earth's motion, in which the perturbation of the moon's attraction was overlooked, and they would not be more faulty, even in a philosophical point of view, than the other. One error to which it gives rise is, attributing many failings to some faculties with which they are not chargeable; many of the faults charged upon the moral faculty, for example, are strictly due to the disturbing forces, of passion, self-interest, association, or the complexity of human action,*-perturbing forces, which it has not the power, as it has the right, to overcome, and which it would be as absurd to charge on the faculty itself, as to charge the eye with deception, because it failed in giving a correct image of an object seen through a distorting medium.

When the late Dr Chalmers reviewed Mr Morell's History of Philosophy a year ago,-seeing his tendency to soar too high in

Dr T. Brown's Lectures, L. 74

his pursuit of the absolute, the infinite,-with the meekness of true wisdom, he would not pronounce the attempt impossible, although he (with no feeble wing) had failed; and, with the tenderness of a Christian parent, he reminded him of the fate of Icarus. The warning is taken as it is meant; but feeling assured that “our wings are not all waxen," our author is determined to try again and again; and these lectures, we presume, are the second report of his upward flight; and had his friendly critic not already gone to a region to which it is not given to material pinions to soar, we doubt not he would have renewed his warning with greater earnestness. And although we have no hope of being heard, when we warn him of danger to himself, shall it also be in vain when we plead the danger of the truth he seeks to establish as a new basis; will he peril the religion, the morals, the souls of his countrymen, for the sake of a daring experiment!

It is not humility in us to confess that we have been unable to follow him in his lofty flight. We have no ambition to soar beyond the region of air,-we dare not, if we could, gaze on the Infinite, in whose presence angels veil their faces. And neither, we think, would our author, or his fellow aspirants after a prima philosophia, did they know, from experience, the blessedness of beholding the glory of Infinity, in milder yet not less divine radiance, beaming through the veil of a frail humanity. And could our exalted father add his testimony from the immediate presence of the Godhead, he would tell us that the object of intense interest in heaven, that manifestation of the Absolute, on which all eyes are centered in delighted contemplation, is the "Lamb as it had been slain." We ought to keep in mind, that there are truths too, high for mortals to attain, too deep for human thought to fathom, and that there is much wisdom in keeping within the proper range of our intellectual powers. We may fruitlessly and injuriously employ our faculties in erring on either extreme. We may destroy our organs of vision, either by gazing with unprotected eyes on the noon-day sun, or by straining them to see objects in the dark.

ART. IV.-1. Dissertations on the Genuineness of Daniel, and the Integrity of Zechariah. By Dr E. W. HENGSTENBERG, &c. 2. Dissertation on the History and Prophecies of Balaam. By the same Author, &c. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark.

We have been presented with a new and most interesting volume

of German theological criticism, which we have no doubt will be much appreciated by the British scholar, not only for the depth of its researches, but also for the interesting matter of which it treats. It is always with a degree of confidence that we sit down to the study of Dr Hengstenberg's books, for we are satisfied with the general soundness of his views, even while we often materially differ from him, and though the reader is rarely startled by the brilliancy of his exegetical acumen, yet he finds

66

"Nantes in gurgite vasto❞

of the display of his vast learning, observations and hints which will oblige and enable him to reform his own views; and perhaps this is the most legitimate province of criticism. Were we allowed to state what seems to us the reason of the little clearness and decision in Hengstenberg's commentations, we would say that it was the want of a thorough and consistent understanding of the Messianic basis of the whole Theocracy. We confess we feel as it were on a high and commanding point of view, but thoroughly enveloped in mist, when we are told, that though a certain prophecy has its fulfilment in this and in that other event, it receives its final and full accomplishment only in the Messiah. This is most literally a turning upside down. To us the Messiah is the centre of all prophecies and promises, which, like as many radii, flow from Him: His coming, His work, His reign, are the skeleton of Scripture. This principle, consistently carried out, will enable us to understand many parts both of the Old and New Testaments. Neglect it, and you may give interesting expositions," but will never stand ground against the attacks of criticism. If our space allowed of it, we would willingly prove the truth of this assertion by referring to the present exegetical contests of Germany. The reason why so many orthodox writers in that country are obliged to retract, even when truth is on their side, is the misunderstanding of Christ's reign, while they obtain the victory over their opponents whenever Christ's work is concerned. Israel's Theocracy, in its totality, will never be understood till its relation to the coming of Christ, (which, be it observed, comprises both his work and reign, in what we would call a "præsens propheticum,") be thoroughly apprehended. This " præsens propheticum" is to us what the genus is to the species, as the general it necessarily contains the particular,-just as the coming of Christ necessarily contains both his work and reign. This is exceedingly important, as it will teach us not only to understand prophecy, but also its connection; to see why Christ's first and second advent are always coupled in prophecy,—and necessarily so, for

the prophecies refer to Christ himself, and as little as he is the Christ merely in respect of his priestly office, so little can prophecies be limited to it. In its own place, we might perhaps try to apply this canon more widely; for example, to the history and destinies of Israel, &c. &c. So far, then, from acceding to the opinion of those who conceive the prophet as it were on a mountain, from which he beholds, in more and more distant ranges, the hills of coming events, and trace the indistinctness of the prophecies about Christ to their distance, we see no indistinctness whatever, save what necessarily attaches to the statements of genus in comparison with those of species, or from the very nearness of conjunction. The logical point of departure for the prophet (though not perhaps the psychological or conscious one) is Christ; and we state it as our conviction, that were we to know all the principles of Jehovah's government, their application to any given nation would give its history, with all the necessity of logical deduction. In Christ, everything is yea and amen; he is the firstborn of all creatures. To repeat the figure used above, he is the centre of the circle. Without such a canon of interpretation, it would be found, for example, impossible to explain many Old Testament quotations in the New Testament; and we cannot refrain from quoting one example, in which our principle is most fully brought out, and which we shall just instance. We mean Isaiah vii. 13-17.

From what we have said, the reader will understand how often and widely we must differ from Dr Hengstenberg, notwithstanding all the respect we entertain for his learning. The part of the work which has engrossed most of our study, is the history of Balaam and his prophecies; and it is to it especially we would direct attention. The question of Balaam's character could not but attract our attention before. It was with the greatest interest that we perused the deeply impressive pages which Dr Grand Pierre has devoted to it in his work on the "Passages difficiles du Pentateuch," one of the few French theological works which the reader will find well worth his perusal. Dr Hengstenberg has devoted comparatively less labour to it than his prophecies, and we regret it. To understand the character of Balaam, we must first of all separate the prophecies, which, by the Spirit of the Lord descending upon him, he uttered, from his own private character; for it is clear that if they, or any part of them, is to form the criterion of our judgment, the point of the history is lost. Evidently Jehovah wishes to encourage his people by turning cursing into blessing, Deut. xxiii. 5; making the very wrath of his enemies praise him, and turning the weapons of the adversaries against themselves. Balaam would have cursed if he