1. Primary Charge delivered to the Clergy of the Diocese of Brechin, at the Annual Synod of 1857, by A. P. Forbes, D.C.L., Bishop of Brechin. Second Edition, enlarged, with an Appendix. Lon- 2. Pastoral Address of the Scottish Episcopal Synod, with reference 3. The Real Presence of the Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Doctrine of the English Church, with a Vindication of the Reception of the Wicked, and of the Adoration of our Lord Jesus Christ truly present. By the Rev. E. B. Pusey, D.D., Ox- Page 1. The American Revival. By James Douglas, Esq. of Cavers, Edinburgh: T. Nelson & Sons. 2. Narrative of the State of Religion within the Bounds of the (American) Presbyterian Church (New School). Chicago, 1858. 3. The Tongue of Fire; or, the True Power of Christianity. By William Arthur, A.M. London: Hamilton, Adams, & Co. 4. The Central Idea of Christianity. By Jesse Peck, D.D. Boston: Henry V. Degen. INDEX TO SELECTED PAPERS. In No. XXIII., Article III. is from the Southern Presbyterian Review ; Articles In No. XXIV., Articles I. and II. are from the Princeton Review ; Article III. In No. XXV., Articles III. and IV. are from the Southern Presbyterian Re- In No. XXVI., Article 1. is from the Southern Presbyterian Review ; Articles *** The Papers marked with an asterisk are Original Contributions to the BRITISH AND FOREIGN EVANGELICAL REVIEW. JANUARY 1858. ART. I.-Professor Baden Powell's Essay on the Study of the Evidences of Natural Theology. Oxford Essays, 1857. PROFESSOR Powell had the distinguished honour to be selected by the Trustees of the well-known Burnett Bequest, as one of the three Judges for determining the relative merits of such treatises as should be presented to the Trustees in the year 1854, the second occasion when the munificent prizes were to be awarded, on the great subject prescribed by the founder, -the leading truths of natural religion. No fewer than 208 essays or treatises, we are informed, were sent in on that occasion. The labour which the judges had to undergo in the discharge of the delicate task assigned them must have been immense; and they are entitled to the thanks, not merely of those who were more immediately interested in their decision, but of the public in general, for the impartial and painstaking manner in which, as is evident from their report to the Trustees, they endeavoured to perform the arduous duty. Their decision, we doubt not, was the expression of their conscientious conviction as to the comparative merits of the numerous treatises. Having had the momentous subject of the evidences of what is termed natural theology thus prominently brought under their consideration, and it being reasonable to suppose, as Professor Powell remarks, that "such an object of competition could hardly fail to call forth existing talent, so as to allow us to consider these productions as affording a fair average estimate of the actual state of knowledge and attainments in reference to such subjects;" nothing could be more natural VOL. VII.-NO. XXIII. A than that the judges should on that occasion have felt impelled to "review the state of the question in comparison with the past and in anticipation of the future." Such reviews, when properly conducted by thoroughly competent persons, of the state of any question which in one form or another must engage the human mind, are of the utmost value. They tend to bring out more and more distinctly the real elements of the question; to shew its relation to other departments of human inquiry; to expose erroneous methods of investigation which may have been previously followed; and to exhibit the true grounds on which a definite settlement of the question must rest, and the actual amount of knowledge to which the human mind may expect to attain respecting it, together with many other collateral results of the highest importance. We know no subject within the whole sphere of human investigation which is more susceptible, or stands in greater need, of such a review than the one brought before us in this essay by Professor Powell; and differing from him as we do on several important points connected with it, we do not the less feel thankful to him for having embraced the occasion referred to, and given us in a short compass his views on the whole subject. We shall best state his design in his own words, which, from the preceding remarks will be easily understood. After observing, as we have already noticed, that "such an object of competition could," in the opinion of the judges, "hardly fail to call forth existing talent so as to allow us to consider these productions as affording a fair average estimate of the actual state of knowledge and attainments in reference to such subjects," he goes on to say, "or, at any rate, we may not unreasonably take the occasion of the Burnett award as a kind of epoch at which it may be seasonable to review the state of the question in comparison with the past and in anticipation of the future. Thus, though making occasional reference to the treatises alluded to [the two Prize Essays], it is not the object of this essay to enter on any detailed criticisms of them, or of other works on the subject, but rather, taking occasion from the discussions thus opened, to bring before our readers some general reflections on the entire state of the question of the evidences of natural theology as it stands at the present day, and with reference to the spirit in which it is now viewed both by advocates and opponents." Such is the design of the essayist; and he next remarks on the tone of mind in which he wishes to conduct the discussion. He is to "treat the argument entirely as a philosophical question, where the point at issue is not the truth of the conclusion, but the mode of arriving at it, involving the necessity for a calm and unbiassed criticism of the evidence on the one hand, and the objections raised against it on the other." He also deems it important to "draw a broad line of distinction between what is practically the course which men pursue in their convictions, and in yielding to the result of those convictions, and what is theoretically the analysis of those convictions, which an inquiring reasoner may follow out. Such an analysis," he justly observes, "may precede the practical results, or may follow them. In the vast majority of cases it can but follow, if indeed it be made at all. Yet this in no way disparages the value and importance of making such an analysis, of qualifying ourselves according to our respective abilities and enlightenment to 'give a reason of the hope that is in us.'" Having remarked on the tone of mind in which this question should be discussed, he passes on to pronounce what we must describe as not only a severe, but, so far as we know, an unmerited censure on those writings which have in our day issued from the press in defence of the great truths of natural theology. We cannot of course tell what particular writings Professor Powell may have seen, but we are entitled to suppose that he alludes to such as are generally known. "From what," he says, "we have seen of writings of this class at the present day, we cannot but notice some very prevalent characteristic faults. They most commonly evince, in our opinion, too violently polemical a spirit; too narrow and exclusive a tone; too strong a tendency to strain the argument beyond due bounds; or, when argument is found to fail, too ready a disposition to make up for deficiencies in reasoning by appeals to feeling; by falling back upon eloquent religious declamation or orthodox denunciation; too much affectation of a turgid mystical style of cloudy metaphysics, mistaken for scientific reasoning, but unfortunately little adapted to answer the real requirements of earnest philosophical inquiry; to remove or obviate the serious and harassing difficulties and doubts in which so many are involved; meeting with too little sympathy; or to satisfy the demands of the acute but often ill-directed and ill-informed intelligence of the masses, which seldom finds a direct, unequivocating, honest, and adequate response to its fair requisitions." Surely this is too sweeping a sentence pronounced on writings which, whatever may be their defects, are designed to defend the fundamental truths of religion and the best interests of society; a sentence charging their authors, not only with vehemence of temper and illogical reasoning, but with equivocation and dishonesty; a sentence, too, the severity of which is wholly unrelieved by any notice of the professed purpose and manifest tone of the opposite class of writings, with which the press |
