As regards Archdeacon Hare himself, however, we are not left to vague conjecture or antecedent probabilities. He has given forth various statements of opinion on the subject, in some of his recent writings, which have not a little startled the Christian public, and led to a very widespread feeling of anxiety as to the opinions actually held by him on this vital matter. The very vagueness and generality of the statements in question has tended greatly to increase this feeling, and has, at the same time, led to exaggerated statements, and injurious surmises, on the part of others, which we deeply deplore, but for which he is himself in some measure to blame. The consequence is, that a good deal of dust and confusion has been raised in the public mind around the whole facts of the case, and a general apprehension become prevalent of serious error in regard to vital truth being entertained in that quarter, without any distinct idea as to what the nature or amount of that error may be. In these circumstances, we think we shall be doing an acceptable service, both to Mr Hare and the public, by stating, as clearly and as fairly as a candid examination of his writings shall enable us to do, exactly how the matter stands. The general misgiving, then, in regard to the views of this author respecting inspiration, seems to be traceable mainly to the following sources :

(1.) The general tone and character of his biography of John Sterling, in which many have thought the author's affection for his friend has been allowed to give the whole work too much the air of an apology for the man. He does not, indeed, make light of the errors of his friend; on the contrary, he mourns over him in bitterness of soul, and with a touching eagerness lays hold of and treasures up the first faint signs of the reviving convictions of better days, even as a mother treasures up the last hopeful words of a beloved child; still, he does not condemn those errors in the tone of one who felt that all serious speculative error springs, more or less, from a moral source, and, therefore, itself involves a moral crime. Besides, many will complain that, while the poison is presented in abundance in the writings of the subject of the memoir, the antidote is not provided in sufficient measure by the author. Throughout, we have presented to us the spectacle of a gifted mind, whose whole convictions, in regard to the authority of the Divine Word, and of every thing that is vital and precious in its contents, one by one give way, until, at last, he sinks into an abyss of utter scepticism, and all this without being accompanied, on the part of his biographer, by such a full, clear, and satisfactory exposition of his own views in regard to the momentous matters in question as might afford an effectual safeguard to the young and inexperienced reader.

This is, we think, a very serious defect, and gives an unsatisfactory character to the whole work, the feeling of which only increases as you advance towards the last line. On the subject of inspiration, more especially, every thing is left vague and undefined. Throughout, we feel that the author, to a certain extent, sympathises with the doubts and difficulties of his friend in regard to the matter; but how far those feelings have prevailed in his own mind, and to what positive result they have led, he nowhere gives us the means of determining. Thus he lays himself open to all sorts of unfavourable surmises, and puts it in the power of his antagonists to identify him with the opinions of his friend almost to any extent which a suspicious or unfriendly criticism may assign. How much painful uncertainty, and, possibly, undue alarm, might have been saved by an explicit and frank declaration, on our author's part, of the views he actually holds!

(2.) Certain strong and somewhat contemptuous expressions of dissent from the views on the subject generally prevalent among British Christians. Thus, he speaks of Sterling's views of inspiration having been unfavourably influenced by the exaggerated importance ascribed in our popular theology to certain ignorant, uncritical, baseless assumptions concerning literal inspiration." Again he says, in regard to Sterling, he had grown "to regard an intelligent theory of inspiration and of the relation between the Bible and the faith which it conveys, as the most pressing want of our church. That it is a most pressing one is, indeed, certain, and such it has long been acknowledged to be by those who meditate on theology."† In another work, he quotes, with apparent approbation, a sentence from Ackermann, in which the popular views of plenary inspiration are treated with something like levity, as putting the writers of the Bible in the position of "drawers wherein the Holy Ghost puts such and such things,"-thus making "their recipiency, with reference to the Spirit inspiring them," merely "that of a letter-box." But, while thus strongly dissenting from the views of his brethren, he nowhere gives us any clue to the character of his own sentiments on this confessedly vital subject. "Of course," he says, in reply to some strictures in the English Review, "I shall not be tempted by the reviewer's defiance to enter into a discussion on the inspiration of the Scriptures. He fancies that the only

*Life of John Sterling, p. 130.

+ Ibid.

+

See, however, the whole passage in "The Mission of the Comforter" (p. 300, 2d edit.), in which it will be seen that the subject in hand is rather the mode of inspiration than the amount. The idea, however, on which so much stress is laid by this and other writers, of inspiration being dynamical, not mechanical, has been very often made the groundwork of a very low theory on the latter and far more momentous question. After all, the real question is not the mode of inspiration, but the extent and the actual result,-whether a fallible or an infallible revelation of the will of God.

reason why those who cannot adopt the popular view on the subject do not straightway promulgate another view, is personal fear. Having his own opinions ready cut and dried, as he received them from his teachers, he cannot conceive why others should find any difficulty in the formation and exposi tion of theirs, on this mysterious and delicate subject. He does not understand how they should hesitate to bring forward what they feel to be immature and imperfect, nor how they should shrink from the shock it would be to many pious persons, if they were led to doubt the correctness of their notions concerning the plenary inspiration of every word in the Bible.' The above, then, comprise about the sum-total in the way of direct and explicit statement on this momentous subject which we have been able to find in Archdeacon Hare's writings. It will be seen that they are entirely negative,―rejecting, unhesitatingly, the views now prevalent in this country as utterly untenable, but substituting no better and securer theory in their place. We can, indeed, entirely sympathise with the feeling expressed in the closing words of the last quotation, and which must make every wise man ponder well before, in any case, he rudely tear up even the groundless prejudices which have become bound up with the very faith and Christian life of a people. We honour that feeling, and give to our author the fullest credit for being actuated by it; but we think he might have considered that the shock from which he shrinks has been already given by the manner in which he has dealt with the subject, and to a degree, probably, much greater than if he had given a clear and explicit exposition of his own views. We very much doubt if the most "immature and imperfect" statement of the general principles he holds on this vital matter which would be likely to emanate from his pen, could tend so painfully to disturb the minds of pious men, as such bare assertions as he has made of the baselessness of the views which they have hitherto held sacred. To be told of the insecurity of the ground on which you stand, must, in any case, give a certain shock; but the shock will be greatly lessened if, at the same time the alarm is raised, some indication is also given of the region where a better and firmer footing may be found. Let us not be misunderstood. We do not say that Archdeacon Hare was bound, in the circumstances, to come forward with a complete theory of his own to supplant those which he had denounced as unsatisfactory. A person may well feel the want of such a work, and yet not recognise in himself either the capacity or the call to supply it; but we do think that while openly proclaiming his conviction of the base

"Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour," &c., p. 26.

lessness of the prevailing view, it was his duty, and especially in connection with such a subject as that of Sterling, to have indicated, at least generally, the ground which he himself considers tenable, and thus given to those who should follow him in rejecting the common theory some idea of the direction in which they might find rest for the soles of their feet.

The facts, then, in regard to this painful subject seem to be briefly these: Archdeacon Hare rejects the doctrine of the plenary inspiration of the Holy Scriptures, as held by the great body of religious men in this country; he regards that doctrine as wholly untenable; he considers the substitution. of another, and an "intelligent" theory on the subject, in place of that now prevalent, to be one of the most pressing wants of the times; his views, then, diverge more or less from those which so many thousands of his countrymen hold sacred; but to what extent-whether only by a difference comparatively small, or by the widest possible gulf of separation-he nowhere affords us the means of determining. Such seems the simple truth; and it is important both for Archdeacon Hare himself, and for the public, that it should be distinctly known precisely as it is.

Into the subject of inspiration itself, we have, of course, no intention of entering in this place. It is a large subject, and one which must again and again occupy a prominent place in the pages of this Journal. We are, we believe, fast entering on an epoch in the church's course when this great argument must be taken up anew, and when it will become every where the one absorbing question of the day. Apart altogether from the inevitable influence of the German theological literature, in bringing every aspect of the subject under the view of the English mind-an influence which must every day increase-every thing in the theological tendencies of the times in our own country is evidently working in the same direction. The same spirit of inquiry which labours to penetrate to the heart of every other question, will sound the foundations of this the most important of all. From this impending struggle we cannot escape even

Were we to venture a conjecture we should gather from the whole spirit and strain of our author's writings, that his position in regard to this subject must be very near that occupied by the middle German school of Neander and Tholuck. We have no ground, we fear, for placing him at a higher point; while on the other hand his whole views of the Spirit's work, and the plenitude of his power poured out on the apostles, together with the reverential and healthy tone in which he himself habitually deals with the letter of the Word, seem to forbid our assigning him a lower. His very holding the orthodox doctrine of the Holy Ghost necessarily places him far in advance of Schleiermacher, and in the direction of his sounder and more advanced disciples. It is possible, however, that our author may be on this point a close follower of his great master Coleridge, as his views are developed in his "Confessions of an Inquiring Spirit." In that case the result would not be greatly different, as Coleridge's view of the amount of inspiration, (laying out of account his peculiar theory about the mode), lies very much about the position we have conjecturally fixed for our author.

if we will. No cordon sanataire can avail to protect the sacred preserves of our ancestral orthodoxy from the inroads either of homebred heresies, or theories of foreign growth. By no mere defensive wall, whether of ignorance, or prejudice, or simple denunciation, can the contagion of error be withstood, any more than you could by such means beat back the advance of the cholera or the plague. The citadel of the truth can be maintained only, as of old, by the valiant defence of its faithful champions-by men who thoroughly know and have tried their ground, and are prepared to meet the adverse host, not in the worn-out armour of the past, but with weapons and a method suited to their times. To that warfare we ourselves look forward without fear or misgiving as to the ultimate result. The ordeal may be severe, but out of it the imperishable and eternal Word will come forth unharmed. The splinters of human theories and partial views may crumble away, but the living rock will remain. Our only anxiety is, that the champions of our old British theology, and especially here in Scotland, may be prepared worthily to bear their part in the impending contest. To do this, we must be prepared to meet our adversaries on their own ground. What is wanted now is not mere general arguments, however able and powerful, in behalf of the possibility, or the necessity, or on the mode of inspiration, but a profound and thorough grappling with the positive objections on the field of modern criticism, which have been raised against the doctrine as held and maintained by us. The results of an erroneous and dangerous criticism can only be fully met by a truer and a deeper criticism on the other side. We are not depreciating the other departments of this great subject to which we have referred; these will doubtless prove abundantly sufficient to meet all the wants of that large class who have never entered, and have no occasion to enter, the thorny and tangled ground on which the difficulties in question occur; but there are others in whose path these difficulties must inevitably lie, and to these no handling of the subject can be satisfactory, which does not at least fairly look them in the face and take them into account. The very appearance of seeming to evade such questions may often be injurious to inquirers in a certain state of mind, while, on the other hand, the mere feeling that our teachers and guides are thoroughly conversant with the difficulties which trouble us, and have fully weighed and allowed for them in maturing their own convictions on the whole subject, has of itself an assuring and tranquillising effect on the young and anxious mind.

Of Archdeacon Hare's career as a churchman and public man during the stirring and eventful scenes of recent years, our space will not now permit us to speak at length. That