« PreviousContinue »
made Hudibras a bosom-friend ? Robinson Crusoe carried captive Johnson, Scott, Chalmers, and the “gentle Elia,” and held them prisoners all their days; besides a host of others hardly less celebrated. Coleridge never lost his enthusiasm for Bunyan's Pilgrim. Burns' first choice was the Life of William Wallace ; next, that of Hannibal. Rousseau's Confessions was Hazlitt's vade mecum: Cobbett's was the Tale of a Tub. Byron revelled in Burton's Anatomy of Melancholy; so did Samuel Johnson. In what else were these two men alike? Charles Lamb never tired of Sir Thomas Browne and the Urn-Burial. The elder Pitt studied Barrow's Discourses as a text-book of mental discipline : Johnson, again, made Don Quixote his unfailing resource for a good laugh. This sturdy old critic used to say that the only books of a merely human origin which anybody wished to be longer
The Knight of La Mancha, Robinson Crusoe, and the Pilgrim's Progress. Dictionary-makers are not necessarily Dryasdusts.
NOT DEATH, BUT LIFE.
Thoc'st gone within the vail
Oh! death is more divine
The Christian journey is a walk afoot, that he may notice and attend to the common road-side matters and duties of life; not a fast drive nor a railway rush through the world, with an eye on nothing but the terminus. So Jesus walked through Palestine, never in a hurry, never in a torpor; but, as Goethe has so inimitably given the thought in another connection — “Like a star, unhasting yet unrest
OUR English Cousins. - The present would be a good time to compile a book to be entitled, “The Curiosities of English Journalism; or, Collectanea Jocularia.” These same journals have always been of a sufficiently entertaining character, whenever matters in the United States have been the subject of their lucubrations. Latterly they are so strongly provocative of merriment that we can think of no better specific for dyspeptics than the regular perusal of English newspapers. Whether it be our geography, our manners and customs, our government and constitution, or the war, their floundering ignorance is as grotesque as the dancing of a man half intoxicated; while the loftiness of their conceit and the coolness of their arrogance remind us very strongly of a nation that pronounces itself CELESTIAL.”
We have no doubt there is a sturdy moral principle underlying all, as there is also a readiness to prove their foundations. For example, in Black’s “ General Atlas," published in London, England and Wales are made to fill four folio pages, without including Scotland and Ireland; while for the United States two pages are found quite sufficient. Now, then, what can be plainer, to English eyes, than that England and Wales are just twice as large, in geographical extent, as the United States ?
We are most amused just now, however, to observe how much better they comprehend all matters whatsoever pertaining to the present war than we do ourselves — such as its origin, the proper mode of conducting it, what we are fighting for, and what, on the other hand, we ought to be fighting for. The "Thunderer," of course, takes the lead, while a motley assemblage of smaller craft may be seen following diligently in the rear. Among these is the London “ British Standard,” whose editor, the Rev. Dr. John Campbell, serenely tells us that he is competent to understand all the main things connected with our present position much better than we can possibly do, because, forsooth, he is disinterested and we are not ! He proceeds to instruct us, accordingly, that we are fighting, not at all as we, in our poor ignorance, imagine, but for “ an idea !” As to the South, the same wise man informed them and the world in general, some months ago, that they were fighting precisely as the ten tribes fought against the wicked and oppressive Rehoboam ; we, the Rehoboam of these latter days, having oppressed them with taxes, year after year, till the cruel injustice culminated and became absolutely intolerable in the Morrill tariff.
Perhaps we ought not to be surprised after this, however we might be if we considered his Christian character and clerical profession –
to find Dr. Campbell, when the news of the seizure of the rebel ambassadors reached England, fulminating like Mars in the next issue of the “ Standard.” The “Times” itself was not more furious in its wrath, indeed it was, on the whole, calm, in comparison. At the same time that the Binneys, and Brocks, and Newman Halls, and Spurgeons of the Metropolis - true representatives of the great Christian communi
ty in England — were earnestly deprecating war, speaking kind words of America, extenuating her conduct, and endeavoring to allay the rising popular passion, the editor of the “ Standard” roared, and shook his mane, and lashed his tail, as if he had been the veritable British lion. It happens, at about the same time, that he sees in some of our Boston and New York journals an earnest attempt to vindicate our claim to know something about our own particular affairs, and to cast a little light before the eyes of Englishmen. At this he soars almost out of sight, in stupendous amazement; but, anon, comes near enough to our planet to say what sounds very much like most bitter satire upon himself, as follows:— “All that mind of the first order, logic and rhetoric and polemic skill could do has been done, but to no purpose. No power on earth can alter our views.”! He gravely admonishes us, moreover, that since he has always been the friend and patron of the United States, it behooves us to listen meekly to his counsels in our present difficulties.
The following is another of the precious things manifested in his columns the same day, (January 3, 1862, from the pen of a correspondent :
“ I am distressed and amazed at the conduct of the Americans, and cannot account for it on rational principles. They seem to be given up to the domination of their proud, overbearing, wrathful passions, which have so prostrated their mental faculties, that they readily believe a lie, and act the madman. I tremble and shudder in thinking of the future of that country, so promising, and so abundantly favored by the bounties of Providence; so rich in natural advantages, and in educational, civil, and religious privileges. But, alas ! where grace abounded, sin, cruelty, and injustice did still more abound! And now, it would appear, wrath is coming upon them to the uttermost. Nothing but blood, it seems, will quench their fiery spirits; and that blood will flow in torrents ! Oh for Heaven's mercy on that unhappy peo
We earnestly hope that our good brother may alight in safety somewhere. We shall look anxiously to see where.
SITTING IN PRAYER, AND SO FORTH. A recent “Princeton Review” gives us a bit of church history which is new to us, but carries
internal evidence of its own truthfulness. Discussing “the relation of the body to the doctrine of sanctification,” it says that, in the region of the reviewer's personal knowledge, the present fashion of sitting during public prayer was one of the “new measures” of thirty years ago. A preacher of that class from western New York held protracted meetings in churches where standing in prayer was the general habit. He requested the congregations to remain seated and to bow their heads in prayer. They did so, and have been doing so ever since all but the bowed head. There can be no doubt that this indolent practice is detrimental to the spirit of devotion. It is a lapse from pew-propriety in the house of the Lord, as great and objectionable as for the occupant of the pulpit to array himself “in the garb or to assume the manners of a coxcomb, a fop, a sloven, or a jockey, whether genteel or vulgar.” Would any of our ministers feel complimented in knowing that either of these epithets was applied to them? Then if some of them had ears sharp enough to hear, they would enjoy this very compliment at least in one or two of its forms, from quarters entitled to respect. It is to be hoped that we have touched the extreme of nonchalance, and shall begin soon to drift backwards.
Rev. A. K. H. Boyd. — Our readers may like a glimpse of the “ Country Parson” (now an Edinburgh parish minister) whose “ Recreations” are reviewed in this number. A letter-writer abroad describes him as tall, with dark hair and whiskers, a little under forty to appearance, and a fresh and attractive preacher. This we should expect, but hardly so energetic a personal presence, from his easy, flowing pages, — any more than the sounding, numerous prose of Ruskin would suggest the slight, small, nervous physique of the great artcritic.
The hardening effect of excited emotion, in novel-reading and theatrical exhibitions, for example, which produces no practical results, is like the dropping of moisture in a cavern, which turns into rock, and fills it with petrifactions.
To leave God out of history, Lamartine has somewhere said, is to paint a landscape without a sky.
Ruskin has an equally true thought, on another subject — that greatness can only be rightly estimated, when minuteness is justly reverenced.
Vol. II.—MAY, 1862.—No. 9.
THE CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE OF JUSTIFICATION.
We propose to treat this subject in the light of Christian experience, rather than of philosophy or speculation. We take the language of Scripture bearing on the subject, in its common or popular sense, as we suppose language on so important a theme, addressed to all men, of every age, clime, and culture, was intended to be taken. We shall not, therefore, adopt the distinctions of the schools, nor analyze and divide and subdivide, till all religious interest and all power of spiritual apprehension are dissipated and frittered away on abstract intellectual processes ; but strive to apprehend, so far as we may, a living doctrine in a living practical way.
Before proceeding to speak of the doctrine in question, it will be well for us to endeavor to realize to our minds the precise relation in which the sinner stands to law.
The law to which we are amenable is not arbitrary in its requirements, but merely expresses the necessary relations of the finite soul to God, the necessary conditions of holiness, and, consequently, of blessedness — the same after as before the introduction of sin into the world. The law, the conditions of holiness, do not change, because the moral character of man changes. The law is no sliding scale to suit the character of men of different ages or culture, their ability or their inability
VOL. II. —NO. IX.