[51] See the _Official Report of the Church Congress held
at Manchester_, October 1888, pp. 253, 254.
[52] In this place and in the eleventh essay, there are
references to the late Archbishop of York which are of
no importance to my main argument, and which I have
expunged because I desire to obliterate the traces of a
temporary misunderstanding with a man of rare ability,
candour, and wit, for whom I entertained a great liking
and no less respect. I rejoice to think now of the
(then) Bishop's cordial hail the first time we met
after our little skirmish, "Well, is it to be peace or
war?" I replied, "A little of both." But there was only
peace when we parted, and ever after.
[53] Dr. Wace tells us, "It may be asked how far we can rely
on the accounts we possess of our Lord's teaching on
these subjects." And he seems to think the question
appropriately answered by the assertion that it "ought
to be regarded as settled by M. Renan's practical
surrender of the adverse case." I thought I knew M.
Renan's works pretty well, but I have contrived to miss
this "practical" (I wish Dr. Wace had defined the scope
of that useful adjective) surrender. However, as Dr.
Wace can find no difficulty in pointing out the passage
of M. Renan's writings, by which he feels justified in
making his statement, I shall wait for further
enlightenment, contenting myself, for the present, with
remarking that if M. Renan were to retract and do
penance in Notre-Dame to-morrow for any contributions
to Biblical criticism that may be specially his
property, the main results of that criticism, as they
are set forth in the works of Strauss, Baur, Reuss, and
Volkmar, for example, would not be sensibly affected.
[54] See De Gobineau, _Les Religions et les Philosophies
dans l'Asie Centrale_; and the recently published work
of Mr. E.G. Browne, _The Episode of the Bab_.
[55] Here, as always, the revised version is cited.
[56] Does any one really mean to say that there is any
internal or external criterion by which the reader of a
biblical statement, in which scientific matter is
contained, is enabled to judge whether it is to betaken
_au sérieux_ or not? Is the account of the Deluge,
accepted as true in the New Testament, less precise and
specific than that of the call of Abraham, also
accepted as true therein? By what mark does the story
of the feeding with manna in the wilderness, which
involves some very curious scientific problems, show
that it is meant merely for edification, while the
story of the inscription of the Law on stone by the
hand of Jahveh is literally true? If the story of the
Fall is not the true record of an historical
occurrence, what becomes of Pauline theology? Yet the
story of the Fall as directly conflicts with
probability, and is as devoid of trustworthy evidence,
as that of the creation or that of the Deluge, with
which it forms an harmoniously legendary series.
[57] See, for an admirable discussion of the whole subject,
Dr. Abbott's article on the Gospels in the
_Encyclopædia Britannica_; and the remarkable monograph
by Professor Volkmar, _Jesus Nazarenus und die erste
christliche Zeit_ (1882). Whether we agree with the
conclusions of these writers or not, the method of
critical investigation which, they adopt is
unimpeachable.
[58] Notwithstanding the hard words shot at me from behind
the hedge of anonymity by a writer in a recent number
of the _Quarterly Review_, I repeat, without the
slightest fear of refutation, that the four Gospels, as
they have come to us, are the work of unknown writers.
[59] Their arguments, in the long run, are always reducible
to one form. Otherwise trustworthy witnesses affirm
that such and such events took place. These events are
inexplicable, except the agency of "spirits" is
admitted. Therefore "spirits" were the cause of the
phenomena.
And the heads of the reply are always the same.
Remember Goethe's aphorism: "Alles factische ist schon
Theorie." Trustworthy witnesses are constantly
deceived, or deceive themselves, in their
interpretation of sensible phenomena. No one can prove
that the sensible phenomena, in these cases, could be
caused only by the agency of spirits: and there is
abundant ground for believing that they may be produced
in other ways. Therefore, the utmost that can be
reasonably asked for, on the evidence as it stands, is
suspension of judgment. And, on the necessity for even
that suspension, reasonable men may differ, according
to their views of probability.
[60] Yet I must somehow have laid hold of the pith of the
matter, for, many years afterwards, when Dean Mansel's
Bampton Lectures were published, it seemed to me I
already knew all that this eminently agnostic thinker
had to tell me.
[61] _Kritik der reinen Vernunft_. Edit. Hartenstein, p. 256.
[62] _Report of the Church Congress_, Manchester, 1888, p. 252.
[63] _Fortnightly Review_, Jan. 1889.