views which might enlighten the world. Fair criticism they would welcome; but observation if not ex perience has taught them, that their views will not be met with a courteous and simply argumentative review, refuting what is erroneous, and confirming what is true; a review in the justice of which they must themselves acquiesce even if it should be unfavorable; but they have been taught to expect, that they must defend their opinions, if they dare utter them, not against misapprehension only, but against misrepresentation, obloquy and defamation; that they must suffer for the bare act of presuming to differ from the received opinions. They therefore prudently lock up their thoughts, to be published, if ever, after they have found the repose of the grave, leaving to posterity the benefit of what should have blessed their own age. This is to be regretted not solely because the truth is suppressed, but because error is thereby driven into concealment, where it can not be easily met and vanquished. Darkness is the natural element of error. It makes its way by stealth. It can not bear the light of discussion. Truth always triumphs in the open field. A man can hardly recover himself from errors which he cherishes in secret. He should be encouraged to declare them openly, that they may be refuted; not merely banished from his own mind, but from others, and deprived of all chance of spreading in the world. Whether, therefore, we regard the effect of intimidation on the lover of truth who has ideas of great value concealed in his breast, or on the errorist who clings the more hopelessly to his delusions, it is plain that a great wrong is done to the cause of truth by this manner of controver sy; or rather, as we should say, by this suppression of free inquiry.

It would do us injustice if any should infer from our remarks, that we would sacrifice the truth to good

manners; that we put the gentleman, in our esteem, above the faithful advocate of truth. We believe that it is better to offend than to be false; and that if offense is taken at the truth, not at the manner of pre. senting it, the fault is that of the offended party, not of the offender. We believe there is a way of asserting truth in the fullest, clearest, strongest terms; and of defending it against all perversion; without the least taint of bitterness, without unfairness, without offensive personalities, without incivility to the other party. The character of a gentleman need not be laid aside by the Christian controvertist, but must necessarily be maintained by him as a part of his panoply, if he would do his work well.

It would be equally a mistake if any should suppose that we disapprove of all severity. Nothing is more severe to errorists than the truth. There is a strong line of distinction between holding an oppo. nent up to ridicule with malice prepense, and showing by the clear light of argument that his opinions. are absurd and ridiculous. Our object should be to show the falsity of his opinions, not to expose him to contempt; and then if with the evidence of their falsity comes out their ridiculousness, it should be no grat ification to us, that it is pain to him. With Paul, we should rejoice, not that he was made sorrowful, but, if it should be so, that he sorrowed to repentance. In one word, in going into controversy, we should carry with us the Christian spirit; giving ourselves to prayer, remembering how much the very nature of the work exposes us to irritation of temper; studying to understand the whole matter at issue; to divest ourselves of prejudice and party spirit; to impress our opponent and all observers with a conviction of our hon esty, candor and love of truth; endeavoring prayerfully to maintain toward him a spirit of love, in spite

of every provocation. No one whom we think to be unworthy of such consideration should be accepted by us as an antagonist.

It would be a stranger misapprehension still, if any one should suppose that we are blind to our own sins in controversy. The New Englander has aimed to be true to the principles here asserted. We have in a few instances been provoked by insults and puerilities, arrogance and weakness, not into any bitterness of spirit, but into the infliction of condign punishment on the offender, which, instead of bringing him to repentance, awakened compassion for him in the community. We think our ill success in these transgressions of the outward law of controversy, should not only effect a reformation in us, but impress others with a love of the better way. With these few exceptions, we, as critics, have always maintained a courteous bearing toward those whose opinions we have felt it to be our duty to oppose. This we are happy to believe is the estimation in which we are held by all our readers, without as well as within the pale of our own communion. We recollect but one instance in which a contrary testimony has been given (see Church Review, Vol. I, p. 83); and that is from an author who had been irritated by a heavy blow upon the reputation of his favorite work, and who we suspect has read those articles only in the New Englander, which were particularly severe because particularly just, against the errors of a party in his own communion. Whoever thinks unfavorably of our course, we hope will consent to an oblivion of past of fenses, if we should succeed in redeeming the pledge virtually given in this article.

We have brought this subject be fore our readers, in full view of the demand yet to be made for the exercise of a spirit of allegiance to the Christian law of controversy.

In no previous age has the tendency to unanimity on all great questions been so strong. We now have the promise after ages of dissent and discord, of something like harmony in regard to political science, in regard to ethics, and even in regard to theology. The rapid diffusion of thought from mind to mind, from continent to continent, is beginning to yield its fruit in the production of a common faith. Still much remains to be done to complete the harmony of all good men. The spirit of the old controversies still lives in the sects. They are too jealous of each other, to discuss any question at issue between them with gentleness, patience and meek. ness. A new spirit, the spirit of Christian love, which never wanton. ly offends; a guileless spirit which never perverts the truth, needs to be breathed into the church universal. This will inspire mutual confidence by deserving it, and harmonize opin. ions by disarming prejudice.

But we deceive ourselves if we suppose that the questions which have hitherto divided the Christian world, being settled, will be rested in as the end of controversy. Many of these questions we predict, will be lost sight of, as too trifling to oc.. cupy the cares of the church amid the differences of the future. We have fallen upon the times foretold in the Bible, when many shall "run to and fro"-when truth as well as error shall be questioned and subjected to every possible test-shak. ing all things that the things which can not be shaken may remain. Io this conflict the hearts of many will faint within them. Sustained by no strong reliance on the power of truth and the faithfulness of God, they will see with consternation the demolition of old party lines, and cry out in terror, "if the founda tions be destroyed, what shall the righteous do?" The foundations will not be destroyed. They are they that will remain because they

can not be shaken. It is a calm assurance of this security which we hope may possess the breasts of all parties to the theological controver sies of the future. This calm assurance will allay all painful excite ment of the public mind, at the announcement of novel opinions. It will insure to those opinions a fair discussion, and to the cause of truth a conclusive determination of them. Every error which does not carry

its own denial on its face, will be refuted by argument, and not blown into importance by the persecution of its advocates. The friends of truth, being calm in the conviction of their strength, will no longer be tempted to defend their positions against the errorist by unlawful weapons. How desirable this as surance is for the peace of the churches in the coming conflicts, we need not say.

LORD BACON deserves the epithet, "many-sided," among philosophers, as Shakespeare does among poets. Not that he advances at one time, an opinion of Epicurus, then another of Plato, and again a third of Zeno; but that the partisans of each sect in philosophy claim the same statements, and assert that the spirit of his philosophy is derived from their own. Nor is he simply a philosopher, as the term has been commonly defined; a cosmopolite, an original, a man of business; one finds it hard to decide whether he has all the "idols," or none. No system of philosophical criticism ranks him high enough to justify at all the impression, which every student of him has of his greatness. We shall have to make a new one, on purpose for him, as the lovers of Shakespeare have for the "myriadminded" poet. Meanwhile some thing may be said from the lawyer's side, or corner. And first, as to the influence of the study of jurisprudence, in producing that "spirit of the age," of which the Baconian philosophy was the expression.

The Protestant Reformation-that first turbulent assertion of the independence of reason, and the worth of man; the gift of soul to the

masses; the concurrent rise of the lower classes, forcing the common wants of man upon the attention of the learned, and infinitely increasing the practical power of the race; the discovery of America, and of the passage to India, opening a boundless field of labor for these new powers; directing immense energies to commerce; forming new connections; and modifying the manners, industry, and government of the world— necessitated a change in the spirit of the age, from speculation to action. The immense interests thus originated, claimed for their management the highest exertion of a high order of intellect; the necessary effect of this application of intellect to practical affairs, was to produce rules for the conduct of such affairs, and a continual improvement of these rules; while the invention of printing, recording every thing, and pub. lishing every thing, would induce the writing and systematizing of them, and so necessarily lead to a philosophy of action and of progress. The study of jurisprudence was among the causes, which contributed most to urge the advance, and shape the course, of all these events. The Roman law is a science nearly corresponding to the Baconian model.

A few political principles lie at the foundation of it; the application of these principles to particular cases, according to the laws of justice and morality, constitutes the civil code. In digesting this code, the lawyers must have proceeded upon the theory of our common law, where, as in the natural sciences, new rules are not originated and promulgated by absolute authority; but it is taken for granted, that there is a legal right, or body of unwritten laws existing, prior to their delivery and formal adoption in the courts; and a decision determines, not what the law shall be, but what it is. Using the language of science, the judges may be said to discover, in the case of new precedents, what the law is, just as, in investigating natural phenomena, the naturalist discovers natural laws; and the method of discovery is the same, except that as men are not so sure to act according to law, as planets are, and the attention of the judges is directed chiefly to perturbations, it is necessary to place more comparative reliance upon principles before established. The truth of each supposed discovery, is carefully tested by applying it to continual causes; and, if it is found not to answer the ends of justice, it is decided to be no law. The law, then, is a progressive science; having, for its end, the benefit of man; for its means, the protection of his rights of personal security, liberty, and private property; for its method, the continual establishing of new principles, by an examination and comparison of facts and principles already established; for its test of truth, the application of its principles to business.

It will at once be seen, that the extensive and diligent study of such a science must have had a most beneficial effect. As early as the eleventh century, it became very common, and, finally, almost universal throughout Europe. The conquering barbarians, and the con

quered Romans, were now coalescing into new bodies, and the spirit of these laws was the life that was breathed into most of the masses, shaping them into organic wholes, making them states.

Thousands flocked to the principal cities of Italy to study them. All the clergy were learned in them. The enthusiasm was universal. Albertus Magnus makes the blessed virgin herself a civilian and a can. onist. "The excellency of an advocate," he says, "lies in three things, to gain a desperate cause, from a just judge, against a wily ad versary; but the blessed virgin gained a favorable judgment, Apud judicem sapientissimum; dominum contra adversarium callidisimum, diabolum, in nostra causa despe rata.'"

This was the only practical learn ing of the dark ages. The subtle intellects, which would weigh the down from the plumage of an angel's pinions, maintained their rela tions to this world by the study and practice of the law; and these same intellects, which we sneer at, as we see them dancing, with their thou sand spirits, upon a needle's point, should acquire a portentous impor tance in the eyes of a money-loving age, as they glide through the stat utes of mortmain, with the wealth of half a kingdom upon their backs. With the advance of the race in practical power, the study of jurisprudence became more extensive, and more intelligent; while the other learning was engrossed in theology and dialectics, in law alone was found a tolerable substitute for moral and political science. The lawyers led the way in commerce, education, and government; and finally, in the person of Lord Bacon, of philosophy.

Upon the 16th of June, 1573, was entered at Trinity College, Cambridge, Francis Bacon, aged 13, fifth son of Sir Nicholas Bacon, Lord Keeper, a diligent and success

ful lawyer and statesman; and Anne, his second wife, daughter of Sir Anthony Cook, eminent for her attain ments as a linguist and theologian; one of the most learned and delectable ladies of the age.

Master Frank was an excellent scholar; but, though he learned his tasks, he laughed at his teachers. Colleges, always conservative, were then in a dotage, mumbling the wise words of by-gone centuries; con. serving the spirit of the dark ages. The whole mind of that young scholar was alive with the spirit of the living present; his heart had already swelled with ambition at sweet words of compliment from Elizabeth; tales of navigators to new and brave worlds, at the setting and the rising sun, had doubtless kindled his imagination; the unspeakable aspirations and hopes of young genius, pregnant with noble conceptions and vast designs, were stirring vigorously within him; gorgeous visions, as of a new Atlantis, rolled before his mind like the moving mass of ocean, and a voice was in his soul, crying, onward; as if the billows spoke, as they marched on, and the winds sung it, as they swept ononward! ever onward! He took up the word, and it was the life of a new philosophy. Theologians were still preaching the intellectual depravity, and perpetual deterioration of the race; philosophers were teaching a corresponding lesson; they looked back to Aristotle and Plato, and saw themselves to be but faint reflections of those great lights of science. The pigmy present despaired before the giant past, or strutted behind it, non passibus æquis," in humble imitation.

66

we the taller of the two, by adding their height to our own." It was from these, then, already made familiar to him by his father and his uncle at home, that Bacon was imbued, thus early, with the progressive spirit.

It was from the same source, that he derived his sentiment of toleration. Indifference seems, sometimes, to have done more to establish truth, than the love of truth itself; as Rousseau says, the atheists of the French Revolution, laid down the purest and highest morality the world had known, because they considered it a mere matter of speculation, in which they had no personal concern. It has been eminently so with this matter of toleration. Papists and Protestants were then alternately murdering each other; schools in philosophy were wrangling with the bitterness of death. The shrewd old lawyers at the head of the English government, who, to say truth, cared little about religion or philosophy, taught and acted upon the principles of toleration, as far as their own safety would permit. From these, Bacon obtained, we think, that spirit which had already, before he left college, in his sixteenth year, led him to project a reform in philosophy, which should make it progressive and comprehensive; the spirit of progress and tol