5". f c . c'_ 
 
 PRINCETON, N. J. ''^ 
 
 Presented byVX^XvS , O. CA . 6A \ V:(2.rA 
 
 Divisio}7 
 Section ■■ 
 
CHRIS11AN ETHICS 
 
 kditilo by thk class ok 1879. 
 
CHRISTIAN ETHICS. 
 
 Apologetics proves that Christianity is the divinely 
 originated religion. It is also ethical. Apologetics is 
 (1) Historical and (2) Philosophical. (1.) Christianity is 
 partly a system of religious truths, institutions &c., i, e. 
 historical, and (2j partly philosophical, since the ques- 
 tions that arise stand related mainly to ethical, meta- 
 pliysical, and natural science. 
 
 Christiayiitu as an Ethical Religion. 
 
 Christian Ethics we take up as a Biblical study, ob- 
 taining facts from the moral character of Christianity 
 partly in the Scriptures and partly in the results of the 
 Christian religion. Christianity is not a philosophy but 
 a religion. What do its moral results show it to be as 
 a religion? What is Christian .society ? How does relig- 
 ion propose to deal with human society to make it 
 Christian ? Some reduce Christianity to mere morality, 
 some to a system of truth or doctrine; it is more: we 
 are to look at Christianity as an ethical religion, not as a 
 system of morals. 
 
 GENERAL PRINCIPLES. 
 
 First: Morality is inseparably connected with relig- 
 ion. 
 
 Second : Christian morality is inseparably connected 
 with the Christian religion. 
 
 Third: The only true, complete morality is the 
 Christian morality. 
 
 Tliree. Preliminary questions. 
 
 1. What is the place of Ethics in Philosophy ? 
 
 "i. What is the place of Christian Ethics in relation 
 to theology ? 
 
 3. What is the place of Christian Ethics in Philosoph- 
 ical Ethics? 
 
I. WHAT IS THE PLACE OF ETHICS IN PHILOSOPHY ? 
 
 By a merely nominal definition, Ethics is the science 
 of the morah 
 
 McCosh " The science of tlie hivvs of man's moral 
 constitntion." 
 
 It is also called the science of hun>an condnct. 
 
 Porter: " Science of human duty." 
 
 Wayland : " Science of moral law." 
 
 These differences arise from different approaches to 
 the subject. 
 
 llie Subject of J^thics.—By common consent it is man 
 in his moral nature and relations. N'otice such terms as 
 merit, demerit, ought, obligation, duty, right, wrong. 
 Ethics is the department in which these are the ruling 
 ideas. 
 
 Ought. The word ought introduces the mind into new 
 regionswhere thematerialis notfound. All materialistic 
 philosophers are confronted with " ought," " right," &c. 
 These words will not down at the bidding of evolution- 
 ists. We use Ethics in preference to moral philosophy 
 because the latter word is ambiguous. 
 
 Sidney Smith: By the term "moral pliilosophy " 
 is popularly understood. Ethics. But the term moral 
 philosophy is misleading and is too inclusiv'e. Moral 
 philosophy is used in a popular sense in<!luding meta- 
 physics, sestlietics &c., and second in a proper sense as 
 opposed to natural philosophy. 
 
 Ethics is a more felicitous and accurate term. From 
 the Greek, edcxaq (moral from wos.) " Morals" relates 
 to the external. Ethics is internal. This term origi- 
 nated with the Greeks. While Ethics has a wide sphere 
 and scope of its own, it does not stand alone. It is re- 
 lated — (1) to psychology because there are faculties to be 
 considered, (2) to metaphysics as cause and effect, (3) 
 to political and social science, jurisprudence and po- 
 litical economy. 
 
 Some of the topics that come up in these relations 
 must be discussed. 
 
 1. The nature and origin of moral ideas. 
 
 2. Faculjties by which man is made capable of moral 
 action. 
 
 3. Relations in which he puts forth moral action. 
 
4. Impulses by which he is urged, and obligations 
 impelling or holding him to right action. 
 
 5. Functions of conscience in reference to moral ac- 
 tions. 
 
 6. Nature and bounds of duty. 
 
 7. Results to character. 
 
 8. Nature of virtue. 
 
 9. Nature of the supreme and secondary good. 
 
 The treatment of these themes will be modified ac- 
 cording to the view we take of man as he should be and 
 as he is. 
 
 Some of the topics relate to man as one moral being 
 alone. Others in his relations to superiors, inferiors, 
 equals, &c. 
 
 Philosophical Ethics discusses man's natural charac- 
 ter, relations, obligations, &c., as reason construes them. 
 
 Theological Ethics is not confined to this. These 
 are only elementary. 
 
 ri, THE PLACE OF CHRISTIAN ETHICS IN RELATION TO CHRIS- 
 TIAN THLOLOCxY. 
 
 One would make it a part of Historical Theology, 
 another, of Practical Theology. 
 
 Rothe separates Ethics from dogmatics; makes 
 dogmatics a branch of historical Ethics and puts Ethics 
 in speculative theology. As to the assignmentof Ethics 
 to practical theology we, cannot regard it a complete or 
 correct view which trejits of Ethics as something to be 
 done in distinction from something to be believed. 
 
 In the moral life the why and Jiow determine the what. 
 In dealing with the why and how there is quite as much 
 of the dogmatic as of the practical. 
 
 Theological science is divided thus: Exegetical, His- 
 torical, Systematic and Practical. If this be a correct 
 division Ethics belo'igs to the third, which includes dog- 
 matic and ethical theology. For two hundred years 
 didactic and ethical theology have been treated sepa- 
 rately for the most part. 
 
 Redemption is fully realized when we do what it is 
 designed that we should. Therefore there should be no 
 separation of the didactic and the ethical. On the other 
 hand it is claimed, and rightly, that there shouldbeasepa- 
 
ETHICS OF OLD TESTAMENT. 
 
 No lona; inspection of O. T. is necessary to show that 
 its system is not cast in scientific form. Moreover, the O. 
 T. mode of presenting things is different from the N. 
 T. The former bears resembhmce to Semitic andJewish 
 types. The religions system of the O. T. is evidently pro- 
 visional, prophetic, and preparatory, not permanent and 
 final; so the mode of presenting its Ethics is different. 
 That maj' be tolerated in one condition of things which 
 might not be in another. Judaism shows itself inferior to 
 Christianity both in the extent and perf'iction of the re- 
 sults wrought out. 
 
 Some general characteristics of the ethical systems of 0. T. 
 
 a. The ethical system of the O. T. like that of N. T., 
 is presented to us in, with, through, by, con- 
 cerning, the religion with which it is connected. O. T. 
 knows nothing of a religion u'ithoat a morality. Hence 
 the irreligious men are the immoral men and vice versa. 
 Ps. 14 : 1 ; 10 : 4-11 ; 94 : 6, 7 ; Gen. 18 : 19 ; 1 Sam. 15 : 
 22; Is. 1:11-17; Hos. 6 : 7; Jer. 7 : 9, 10 ; Ps. 50 :8 ; 
 Prov. 15 : 8. 
 
 Through the union of morality and religion, the pre- 
 dominant notions of religion are brought to bear on the 
 moral. 
 
 b. It is consistent with this mode of presenting the 
 subject that we note the entire absence from O. T. of 
 the specific, abstract terms used in Philosophical Ethics 
 as dutv, ought, etc. These are part of the religion 
 of 0. t. 
 
 c. It is nowhere found, but always assumed, in O. T. 
 that man has a moral nature, is under moral obligation, 
 and that he knows it, and should live to secure the high- 
 est good. 
 
 General truths fundamental in 0. T. as a religious and 
 moral system.. 
 
 a. The life and power of O. T. are found in its con- 
 ception of God. What we are to be, is shown to us in 
 God. The motives are drawn from him ; God's unity 
 
8 
 
 in opposition to polytheism, hi^ spirituality in opposition 
 to materialism, his personality in opposition to panthe- 
 ism ; these had no little power in making O. T. mo- 
 rality. 
 
 Neander : " The apprehension of God came out in 
 Judaism as it could not in surrounding religions." Its 
 realizoAion of God's holiness is a more important point. 
 When we combine with these his omnipotence, omni- 
 science, omnipresence, we have a faith wliich will be 
 morally efiective as none other could be. 
 
 b. Its teaching of the dignity of individual iiuman 
 nature. Man was made in tlie image of God. This 
 fact gives solemnity to his actions. It is not necesary 
 that his likeness be sharply defined. 
 
 The dignity of man is shown, by the place assigned 
 to him in the order of creation, and by the sharp distinction 
 between him and the other animals. Man has dominion 
 given him over other creatures. After the deluge man's 
 relations are defined and ratified again. There is a re- 
 peated prohibition of man's forgetting his superiority to 
 other animals. On the other hand he is taught to sep- 
 arate himself more and more from the brutes, and perfect 
 his fellowship with God. 
 
 c. The brotherhood of man less perfectly seen in O. 
 T. than in N. T., and yet more prominent there than in 
 any other system. The Bible represents us as brethren 
 in one race ; not in many. 1. The O. T. ascribes the 
 origin of the whole race to one pair, and connects pro- 
 pagation after the deluge with a single family. 2. The 
 duty of sympathy and charity is based not only on the 
 Fatherhood of God but also on tlie brotlierhood of man 
 both in the Law and the Prophets. Gen. 9 : 4-8 ; Is. 
 58: 7. 3. The reach of God's redeeming purpose em- 
 braces all families, as seen in the promise to Abraham, 
 prophecies concerning Gentiles, Is. 56 : 6. 
 
 d. The organization of humanity is of God in all its 
 essential relations and institutions, and the maintenance 
 of this organization is God's deep concern, that it may 
 accomplish his purpose. And God is concerned in the 
 enjoyment by each individual of the advantage for which 
 the organization is instituted. The family is tl)e unit of 
 this organization and must be kept pure. 
 
9 
 
 e. Moral responsibility extends also to man's relations 
 to the interior creation. God gave man dominion over 
 the creatnres but not to use it unlawtVilly. It is not 
 insured to him permanently. Man's dominion is bound- 
 ed by the rights of God and of nature. 
 
 /. Man's treatment and use of himself, whether phys- 
 ical or spiritual, comes within the s[)hereof morals. The 
 0. T. protects man from liis evil self, and demands the 
 best care and culture of liimself Sins against the body 
 are denounced, as also spiritual sins, such as indolence, 
 pride, etc. 
 
 //. God's concern for man's moral life is shown under 
 the O. T. economy, by provision for man's culture and 
 education. Morality is not left without culture. Left 
 to himself man mistakes natural impulse for natural 
 law, the agreeable for th.e obligatory, present ex'citement 
 for permanent good. 
 
 Our nature receives no new elements. God helps 
 us by instruction as to what man's relations arc, and by 
 what the 0. T. does for refining and elevating man. He 
 helps to regain lost purity, quickens moral sensibilities. 
 A personal ruler is put in i)lace of impersonal law. Man's 
 conscience is a monitor for good and evil, to reward and 
 punish. 
 
 h. Motives to the performance of duty are made 
 effective by new and peculiar sanctions in the O. T. 
 Man is not attracted to right or deterred from wrong 
 simply by conscience. Right action secures God's ap- 
 probation as well as the approbation .of conscience. 
 Man is taught that the memory of God is ever enduring. 
 
 The brotherhood of man is well brought out in the 
 O. T., but immortality of the soul is more vague than 
 in the N. T. By the O. T. men are taught to expect 
 retribution and rewards lic.re, hence it has been called a 
 mercenary system. The 0. T. makes more than the 
 New, of present exhibitions of divine approval and con- 
 demnation, e. g.. Job, Eccl. Men who are conscious of 
 God's presence feel the truth, so that the perplexities of 
 Job and Eccl. are removed by implicit confidence in 
 God, going beyond the present to the future, appreciat- 
 ing God's spiritual training beyond the temporal gifts. 
 While the O. T, encourages expectation, the sign is al- 
 
10 
 
 ways less than the tiling signified. Thy favor is life. 
 Even in the N. T. there is promise for the life that now 
 is, as well as for that which is to come, while in theO. T. 
 Balaam desires to die the death of the righteous. 
 
 i. The quality of O. T. morality is displayed by the 
 standard of excellence it sets up. Three (3) tilings no- 
 ticeable ; first the intrinsic excellence, second, the degree 
 of conformity required of us, third, the fitness of the 
 standard itself to promote and secure this required con- 
 formity. 
 
 The standard is the character of God and his holi- 
 ness, the degree required i-< exact correspondence, " Be 
 ye holy, for T am holy." There is unparalleled attrac- 
 tiveness as well as surjiassing gh^ry in this stand ird. 
 This is the most desiral)le excellence. Nothing higlier 
 can be conceiv;ed of. If you lower the standard you 
 lower its attractive power. 
 
 Objections to Old Testament Morality. 
 
 These are in a great vai'iety of forms. Some cour- 
 teous, some offensive. Some disparage the O. T. mo- 
 rality in order to exalt the New. Some are philosoph- 
 ical or speculative. 
 
 Mill : The Old Testament system of morality is bar- 
 barous, fit only for savages. 
 
 I. first objection. 
 
 The God of the 0. T. is represented as partial, fickle, 
 hateful, revengeful and otherwise morally unworthy. 
 
 Bolingbroke says, it is blasphemy to assert that the 
 O. T. writers were inspired, when they attribute such 
 tilings to Divinity as would disgrace humanity. The 
 conclusion that such men draw is, there is a God, but 
 I cannot conceive of him thus; or if this is the best 
 that can be conceived of, then for me there is no God. 
 
 Answer, o. The representation which is largely 
 -predominant in O. T., by common consent, is that God 
 is infinitely exalted, and absolutely perfect in moral 
 excellence. The objector concedes this. If this be so, 
 we ought to be controlled in our interpretation of 
 doubtful passages by this fact. We are not to assume 
 that these writers deliberately falsify their other state- 
 ments. We must harmonize if possible. 
 
11 
 
 h. This liarnioiiiziii«^ interpretation tnnst take into 
 account the context as well as the contents of each pas- 
 sage, the idioms oNaiiiT^nage anil tiie characteristics of 
 the oriental mind. Anthropomorphic style of literature 
 renders such representation ilecessary. When we have 
 allowed for these we claim that the objection falls. 
 Instances. God repents, Gen. G : 5-7. 
 Is fickle, Gen. 8 : 21. 
 
 His dealings witii Pharoali, E.\. 7-14, (chs.) 
 (See Trench's Ilulsean Lectures, p. 96, Ilanna's Bamp- 
 ton Lectures, [). 88.) 
 
 God's anger allayed bv ai»peals to Ilis vanity — E.\. 
 32 :9-seq. : Num. 16 : 20-seq."; Num. 14 : 22, 2:J. 
 
 God lickle with Balaam, iSTum. 22 ch. 
 
 Punislies people for others' sins, 2d Sam. chs. 21, 24 ; 
 Deceives Ahab, 1 Kings 22 ; Deceives the prophet, Ezek. 
 14 : 9. 
 
 , II. SECOND OBJECTION. 
 
 The principle of human brotherhood receives only a 
 very parti:'l and inconsistent treatment in 0. T. 
 
 Bolingbroke urges that the particularism by which 
 the Jews were taught to regard themselves as God's [lecu- 
 Har iieople, took them out of obligation to the rest of 
 mankind. Ans. 
 
 a. This objection proves too much. It destroys all 
 belief in providential distinctions which all men must 
 observe and God is constantly making. 
 
 b. The olijection mistakes or mis-states the nature, 
 ground, and aim of the particularism of the Hebrew 
 system. There is one God of all the earth, who has pur- 
 poses of mercy toward all, though not in the same way. 
 The Hebrews are represented in O. T. as brethren in 
 one human ra(;c, made to differ lor a time and for a pur- 
 pose that good may result to all; the favors that distin- 
 guish the Hebrews at the same time increase their resjjon- 
 sibility. This closer relation to God is not a meritorious 
 relation and the favors they enjoy arc a means to an end. 
 E.vclusiveness has a double object, (1) Defensive; to pro- 
 tect them from contamination, protecting and developing 
 Ilis instrumentalities on earth ; and (2) the securing more 
 full and effectual application of God's instrumentalities 
 
12 
 
 to the whole human race. The wall of partition is to be 
 thrown down. 
 
 There is however a way open for the recognition of 
 human brotherhood. 
 
 From the Pentateuch. IJev. 19: 33. The Jews were 
 to' treat strangers kind!}'. The doors of the Jewish 
 sanctuary were guardedly opened, (i. e. to proselytes.) 
 
 E.\. 23 : 9. They shall not oppress the stranger. 
 
 Num. 15 : 15. As ye are, so shall the stranger be be- 
 fore the Lord. 
 
 Dent. 10: 18. The Lord loveth the stranger. 
 
 From the Prophets. 
 
 Micah 4:1,2. Many nations shall come. 
 
 Is. 56 : 7. God's house a liousc of praj-er for all 
 people. 
 
 Is. 66 : 20. God's glory to be declared among the 
 gentiles. 
 
 Is. 60. Access to the gentiles. 
 
 These show that in the end, a richer result will be to 
 the whole world from this temporary separation. 
 
 III. THIRD OBJECTION. 
 
 There is a divine endorsement of character not ap- 
 proved by our moral sense. 
 
 Ans. «. Divine approbation in many of these cases 
 where God's approbation ise.xpressed, is explicitly based 
 on and restricted to, certain specified aspects of these 
 characters. 
 
 b. In no case is Divine approbation extended to those 
 qualities which provoke our moral censure. 
 
 e. In some cases Divine disapprobation is pronounced 
 upon those points of character which we denounce, and 
 the sins visited with severe judgments. 
 
 d. In no case should we be with God but in every 
 case against God if we withhold our censure from these 
 sins. 
 
 Dr. Ilessey : " The Christian rejects the pleading that 
 will not distinguish between the whole character, and 
 special acts." 
 
 IV. FOURTH OBJECTION. 
 
 The Old Testament represents God as expressly re- 
 quiring, in some instances, acts condemned by our moral 
 
13 
 
 sense, e. g. : Abraham is commanded to sacrifice Isaac ; 
 Moses deceives Pharoali ; the l)orro\ving of jewelry :ind 
 raiment from the Eofyi)tians; Ilosea's marriage ; false- 
 hood of midwives of Egypt. 
 
 Reply: a. In each instance it belongs to exegesis to 
 determine the meaning of the record. Did Ilosea be- 
 come an adulterer? Did the Israelites borrow of the 
 Egyptians 1 
 
 h. In the petition of Moses to Pharaoh, there is no 
 evidence of deception. As the first step in a series of 
 dealings a moderate request is made to allow them to go 
 out to sacrifice. Other steps in God's purpose follow ? 
 
 c. Abraliam's call to sacrifice his son. Some say it 
 had been common for })arents to sacrifice their children, 
 so that God tempts Abraham in this ^^ay, calling him to 
 do a wicked thing. God did not tempt but tried Abraham. 
 It was to [ii'ovc his trust in God, making tlie choice be- 
 tween parental affection and loyalty to God. He is to 
 choose in the midst of exti-aordinary experiences that 
 led him to trust in God. In dealing with God he had 
 learned from tlie first not to count the cost of obedience. 
 He left his kindred not knowing wdiither he went. It 
 was the same now. 
 
 V. FIFTH OBJECTION. 
 
 The Old Testament represents God as expressly re- 
 quiring courses of action towaril nations and races that 
 are condemned by our moral sense. 
 
 Deut. 23 : 6. Thou shalt not seek their peace nor 
 their prosperity all thy days forever — in regard to the Ca- 
 naanites. 
 
 Bolingbroke: "Nothing can be conceived more un- 
 worthy of an all perfect being than tlie manner in which 
 the people were taken from Egypt and the way they got 
 possession of Canaan." 
 
 But was such treatment of hostile tribes intrinsically 
 immoral ? Had God no right t(^ dispossess the Canaan- 
 ites and give the land to Israel, no right to guide Israel 
 to the land of promise, no right to protect them in the 
 possession of it, no right to visit these idolatrous nations 
 for their sins and that in His own wny, no right to pro- 
 tect the world from the influence of their sins? 
 
14 
 
 Suppose no such issue bernade concerniufi^ the Divine 
 right, what shall we say as to the fitness of the method. 
 Pic might have sent a pestilence. 
 
 Several tilings, are to be considered, (Lev. 18 : 3, 24.) 
 
 a. Aggressive war was permitted and prescribed only 
 at certain specified points and for certain specified ob- 
 jects. Otherwise it was merely defensive. They were 
 left to human methods unless God interposed by miracle. 
 
 War for war's sake was never encouraged. For this 
 reason David was denied the honor of building tiie tem- 
 ple, b. These wars were not waged at the instigation 
 or for the indulgence of ferocious passions; but they 
 were in the interest of justice, present auil futui-e holi- 
 ness to Israel and others. Doing evil that good may 
 come, says the objector. 
 
 c. As to the methods and extent of application, the 
 people are not left to their own discretion or caprice in 
 interpreting a commission. They were punished if they 
 fell short of full obedience. It was not evil to protect 
 the present and future holiness ot Israel by a course to 
 which they were strictly held. These cases were never 
 allowed to be made precedents. They were [jrotected 
 while executing their commission. 
 
 VI. SIXTH OBJECTION. 
 
 The O. T. endorses expressions of individual feeling 
 towards one's fellow-man that are offensive to moral 
 judijments, especiallvthe imprecatory Psalms, about fifty 
 'in number. See Ps. 35 : 4, 5, 6, 8, 20; 55 : 10, 16, 24; 
 58 : 7-12 ; 59 : 6, 7, 11-14 ; 69 : 23-29 ; 109 : 6-20 ; 137 : 
 7-9. [See Bib. Sac. Vol. I. 13, 19, Ilanna's Bampt. Lects. 
 1863, McLean's Unity of the Moral La\y.] 
 
 a. These are not the unauthorized malice of private 
 vindictiveness or passion, but inspired utterances which 
 we must seek to harmonize. 
 
 h. These do contain expressions of human convictions 
 and emotions, inciignation at wrong, sense of justice, and 
 desire to vindicate right. Are these wrong? 
 
 c. The Psalmists, in these utterances, are not merely 
 the rdpresentatives of private history and experience; 
 they are more. Their cause is God's. Opposition to it 
 rightly arouses their indiguation and sense of justice. 
 
15 
 
 (^. These nttcraiices in ijeneral re.<t on divine denun- 
 ciations and predictions with respect to evil. 
 
 e. Tliey do reveal the spiiit of a disp3nsation in which 
 the reality, necessit}', and meanino^ of law and justice 
 had been far more i erfectly disclosed than grace. Not 
 appropriate to the N. T. 
 
 VII. SEVENTH OBJECTION. 
 
 The sanctions by whicli the O. T. commends and en- 
 forces what it requires are mercenary and therefore 
 inferioi" if not immoral. 
 
 Bolingbroke : " God purchased as it were, the obe- 
 dience of His people." 
 
 The book of Prov. is charged with motives of pru- 
 dence instead of love. But 
 
 Munscher says the human agent regards the present 
 rather than the future. 
 
 Dillman says the tem[)oral leads man to the spiritual 
 and invisible. Partial Ans. as before. 
 
 1. Present experiences were never designed nor found 
 to be the exact exponent of God's esteem. 
 
 2. The favor signified was alwaj's more momentous 
 than tlie sign itself. 
 
 Objection : sanctions like these, embodying good 
 and ill, are inferior. 
 
 a. When it is said these sanclions are inferior we 
 need have no debate with the obiector,if it be conceded 
 that abstract recommendations and precepts are made 
 effective by sanctions. Moral sanctions may be reinforced 
 by legal, without being superseded or necessarily weak- 
 ened by them. A law not sanctioned is but advice. 
 
 At that stage of revelation sanctions drawn from a 
 future life were imperfectly available. The objection 
 must be against the constitution of human nature, or else 
 against God for having kept back the knowledge of a 
 future life. 
 
 b. As to the demoralizing tendency of this appeal to 
 secular rewards and penalties, we should be obliged to 
 admit tiie objection if certain things were true, for in- 
 stance if it were true that the practice of virtue was 
 commended merely for the sake of gain. This is not 
 true. The appeal is chiefly to God's approbation, and 
 
16 
 
 not to present gain. That the inferior motives were more 
 palpable than the superior, would be a reason for their 
 employment, not the contrary, (-lofl allows the wicked 
 to prosper and chastens Ilis own for a purpose of good, 
 a higher law overruling. National and individual disas- 
 ters, while indicating to the heathen the impotence of his 
 gods, to Israel would indicate the reality of his God. 
 
 VIII. EIGHTH OBJECTION, 
 
 The O, T, contains positive precepts and indirect re- 
 quirements and permissions tliat are in conflict with the 
 teachings of the N. T, and high morality, e, g. the sanc- 
 tity of marriage and monogamy, 3'ct allows polygamy and 
 easy divorce. The brotherhood of rnan, yet admits sla- 
 very ; retaliation is sanctioned. Thus, the 0. T, cen- 
 sures and sanctions the same things. 
 
 a. It is a signal merit of O, T. morality that it deals 
 with the world as it is, existing conditions being ac- 
 cepted as in a certain sense limiting tlie immediate ob- 
 jects of the moral system, 
 
 h. Under tlie 0. T, dispensation God does not deal 
 either with existing defects, or positive evils, in a way to 
 eflect an immediaie revolution. He does not employ 
 supernatural means of conversion, but deals with all evil 
 as in a moral system, in which force is out of place. The 
 eradication of evil is the ultimate result, though gradual. 
 The objection would show that God's wisdom is inferior 
 to that of the objectors. 
 
 c. The legislation of the O. T. in regard to polj-gamy, 
 divorce, and slavery is regulatice. Each is found existing, 
 not at once, always, and everywhere prohibited, but reg- 
 ulated. The removal is left to the slow working of the 
 moral dispensation. Thus monogam}' gradually gained 
 almost entire ascendency in Israel. So also divorce is 
 restricted. Slavery in Israel, as compared with slavery 
 in other nations, although enlightened, as Greece and 
 Home, is less degrading tmd oppressive. A bondman 
 was a servant, not mere merchandise. Under the Mosaic 
 law slavery is lightened and regulated, as far as it is per- 
 mitted at all. Among the Jews onl}^ the Essenes and 
 Therapeutfe put away slavery before Christ. 
 
 Retaliation, as an individual passion, is restrained. 
 The law puta limits on the avenger. It is immoral if 
 
17 
 
 God may not regard society as it is, and adapt His ways 
 to its present state ; if temporary toleration of evil is im- 
 moral. The O. T. does not purport to exhibit the ulti- 
 mate or C')mp]ete rolii!^ion, neither should we expect in 
 it the ultimate morality. 
 
18 
 
 ETHICS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 I. Same General Characteristics and Truths. 
 Many things ti'iie of the 0. T. Dispensation are also 
 true of the i\e\v. 
 
 1. Tliere is the same connection betAveen Morality 
 and Religion. 
 
 The union is vital. Change in heart is necessary to 
 a perfect morality. 
 
 2. Same lack of abstract terms. 
 
 3. Same quiet assumption in N. T. of the existence 
 in man of the essential elements of moral ethics. 
 
 The moral elements of N. T. Dispensation are more 
 conspicuous than those of (3. T. The ceremonial is done 
 away. N. T. Dispensation is for the world, and not for 
 the theocrac}' alone. It is more distinctly ethical. 
 
 IL Same fundamental Truths. 
 
 [a.) The conception of God is central, as in O. T., 
 only more powerful. The question, What is God? 
 answered more fully. Plis moral perfections brought 
 out more clearly, (contrast Sinai with Calvary. Law 
 with Love. 
 
 (6.) The dignity ascribed to human nature; this dig- 
 nity e.xalted by the work of Christ. He died to redeem 
 it. If the image in which it was created furnished one 
 standard, the price paid for it gives another, and union 
 of the human and divine in Christ as the perfect man gives 
 a third. 
 
 The whole work of Christ sets the highest value on 
 human nature. 
 
 (c.) The Brotherhood of Men. Duties before dimly 
 discerned now come out more vividly. N. T. not only 
 does not cancel or obscure the O. T. teachings on this 
 point, but adds and enforces.. Christ's answer to the 
 question, Who is my neighbor ? teaches a broader view 
 of the relations of men. 
 
19 
 
 Patil's teachiiiff the same, " God has made of one 
 blood all nations," Acts 17: 26. Christ's redemptive 
 work not for a ninltitiidc of i-aces but foi- the one race. 
 
 {(/.) The Organization of Ilnnianity. 
 
 This brought out more clearly bv N. T. 0. 1. doalt^ 
 mainly with the Jews. The Iiistorv,. instruction, disci- 
 pline and religion were national, tlie new dispensation 
 can no longer be national when the transient has effected 
 its object. The oi'ganization of humanity is now seen 
 to be fi'om God, and is brought undei- the [yrecepts or 
 moulding s[)irit of the N. T. 
 
 (c.) Inferior Creation. 
 
 The JS". T. calls attention to the use of the world which 
 shall not be an abuse of it. Care of self enjoined in N. 
 T. We are todevelope every organ and faculty, and to 
 use them for proper purposes. The N. T. enhances the 
 dignity of every part of human nature, by wliat Christ 
 planned and expended for the whole. Specific appeals 
 to Christians. " Know ye not that ye are the temple of 
 God." I. Cor. :J: 17. 
 
 " What? know ve ]iot that vour body is the temple of 
 the Holy Ghost?" " I. Cor. 6: 19. 
 
 (/.) Progressive. enlightenment and elevation of men. 
 
 The O. T. system was preparatory. In the JST. T. 
 , education and progress are prominent. The N". T. sys- 
 tem not thus preparatory : not to give place to a new 
 system? it is the /?7ia/ system. The moral results of the 
 Gospel are reached by education from infancy to maturity. 
 As in the individual, so in the world, there is a gradual 
 appreciation of and instruction in morality. 
 
 (//.) The Sanctions of N. T. system are more generally 
 spiritual and less temporal than those of the 0. T. There 
 is less a[)peal to the ])resent. " Having promise of the 
 life that now is and that which is to come," I. Tim. 4 : 8. 
 
 The N. T. holds us to faithfulness in the present, and 
 makes God's favor the best reward and highest aim. 
 Immortality is brought to liglit in the Gospel. The N, 
 T. finds the sanction in God's estimate of human action 
 and the signs by which God chose to express this. It 
 rises above the O. T. in making the rewards unseen and 
 eternal in a greater measure. Even in the O. T. there 
 are appeals to the future. Isaiah is better understood when 
 quoted by Paul. 
 
20 
 
 (h.) The Standard is the same, viz : Holiness. 
 
 We are to be hke God. To prevent discourao^ement 
 in achieving this effect the JN. T. brings in the lite and 
 example of Christ to help ns. Perfect holiness has ap- 
 peared on earth, and the power of His helping hand is 
 offered to ns. 
 
 PECULIARITIES OF N. T. MORALITY. 
 
 The nature of the moral life mav appear from three 
 points of view. (1.) What is demanded of a moral life ? 
 
 (2.) What should mora! life and action be in quality 
 and character ? 
 
 Virtuous. 
 
 (3.) Wliat should moral life aim at as its dominant 
 object? 
 
 The supreme good. 
 
 Hence the three cardinal ideas of Ethics, duty, vir- 
 tue and the virtues, and the supreme good. 
 
 Three questions arise. 
 
 1. Do the revelations of the N, T. add anything to 
 the extent or exactness of man's knowledge of duty ? 
 
 2. Does the IST. T. teach anything new in regard to 
 the power bj- which or the subjective conditions in wliich 
 duty is done. • 
 
 3. DoestheN". T. modify our cone »ption of the supreme 
 good? i. e. of the results aimed at, anticipated and at- 
 tained where Christian virtue exists and Christian duty 
 done. 
 
 Diitii. — A religious morality is more complete and 
 effective than a non-religious morality. Man needs to 
 be under pei'sonal influence. 
 
 A morality based on revealed religion will be higher 
 than one based on a revelation of nature, and a morality 
 based on God's last and highest revelations will be higher 
 than one based on preparatory revelations. We should 
 therefore expect the moraliry of the N. T. to include all 
 that natural religion, philosophy and the O. T. include. 
 
 A. As compared with the 0. T. Dispensation, Chris- 
 tianity makes less of the legal aspects of duty, and lays 
 more stress on its self-evidencing nature. Christianity 
 attempts no metaphysical explanations of duty. It is 
 
21 
 
 practical : its object is to sliow man wliat ho lun to do so 
 as to best secure bis doing it. 
 
 It never argnc? the (|ne?tion of tlic confoniiity of the 
 duty to ninn's natnreor his rehitions. Tiic N. T. aniionnces 
 its requirements as beiiif:^ so transparently riij^ht and rea- 
 sonable as not to need argnment. God's uill is not stated 
 80 much in a legal way as in tlie O. T. Duties are pre- 
 sented as self-jnstifying. Arguments are sometimes used 
 to remove misa])prehension or overcome prejudices. 
 
 Two extremes are to be avoided. One would cxliibit 
 duty as the mere product of God's aibitrary will, the 
 otlier iindsthe apj>roving source of duty in tlie conscience 
 of man iiimself. It deals witli right as abstract and dis- 
 regards God. N. T. goes to neither extreme. What 
 God ''ommands commends itself. Right reason and 
 conscience approve it. More use is made of simi>lc au- 
 thority in O. T. ; less appeal to the understanding. 
 Duties of the N. T. justify themselves as soon as the facts 
 of it are seen, e.g. love and obedience to Chi-ist are evi- 
 dently duties as soon as the facts in regaid to Christ are 
 known. How docs Christianity lift man up to this plane 
 of duty? By increasing oui- knowledge of Ilim; teach- 
 ing us more fully what is His will. Philosophical Ethics 
 must rely upon the validity of moral ideas and hence 
 influences only the few, because they only can apprehend 
 them. The N. T. makes God best known, so exhibiting 
 His nature and character as to render the duties enjoined 
 self-evidencing. 
 
 B. The N. T. rearranges human relations, readjusts 
 duty by connecting all with its new relations of God. 
 
 We have not a multitude of new verbal statements 
 in the N. T., but of facts — things God has done, e. g. In- 
 carnation. Christ acts as and for God. Something 
 more specific is revealed, viz., that the world was created 
 by God through the Logos, The greatest advance is 
 made in the manifestation of the love of God. 
 
 C. Into the substance of duty the N. T. introduces a 
 new simplicity and unity, by making the great all-em- 
 bracing duty to be hvc, and the obedience of love. 
 
 O. T. being a dispensation of law — presented duty 
 in detail, but in N". T. the oneness of all duty is bettor 
 understood. Our love must be appropriate and com- 
 
22 
 
 mensiirate witli tlie object. Toward God our duty ia 
 supreme love. Under O. T. nuiii could not understand 
 the fullness of this claim because that love \>'as not yet 
 fully revealed. Likewise our duty to our fellow-men is 
 more clearly revealed. Deut. vi : 5. cf Matt, xxii : 36, 
 40; Mk. XII : 28, 31. Our Lord makes this duty more 
 self-justifying and efhcient than it was before. Listead 
 of going into detail N. T. says "love is the fulfilling of 
 the law^"' 
 
 D. To those duties which result from man's original 
 constitution and his permanent relations as man, Ciiris- 
 tianity adds a grouj) of duties wliich grow out of man's 
 actual moral state, and what God has done for that moral 
 state. 
 
 N. T. tells us we are sinners. New duties come with 
 the appearing -jf Christ. These duties are contingent in 
 a sense ; not growing out of our nature — not absolute 
 duties. They are now universal — for all men whom God 
 has in view. They have also become primary duties in 
 their importance. The iten»s and order of duty differ 
 from those for a holy race. So the items and order of duty 
 for a race which Chrisli came to save, will differ from 
 those for a race whom ho did not come to save. 
 Two things modify the duty, viz. : the state in which we 
 have come and wliat God lias done for us in that state 
 e. g. Repentance is a duty of fallen man, no matter what 
 God has done or not done. The system of theoretical 
 Ethics might point repentance as a h\i)othetical duty, i, 
 e. if a man sins, he should repent, but in Scripture it is 
 a universal duty. 
 
 Faith does not become a primary dut}' in an evangel- 
 ical sense until God commands it. That God could for- 
 give and redeem was for Him to reveal. As soon as this 
 revelation is made in Christ, a nevr form of faith becomes 
 obligatory, not mere confidence in God. Our duty is to 
 exercise a most specific faith in what God commands 
 through His Son. All the new objects, institutions and 
 agencies that come in the train of this redeeming work 
 become in turn new centres of obligation, e. g. ministr\', 
 sacraments &c. of the church. 
 
 They are secondary and contingent yet real and im- 
 perative. Thoy may properly be called Evangelical duties 
 
23 
 
 because they corue with the Glad-tidings. They lirst find 
 their full recognition in the IS". T. though shadowed in 
 tlie 0. T. 
 
 Among Evangelical duties the N. T. makes faith a 
 necessary antecedent to the acceptable performance of 
 any and all man's genei-al duties. We mean faith in a 
 Christian sense Faith not merely retrospectively hut 
 prospectively indispensable. Rom. 14: 23," Whatsoever 
 is not of faith is sin." Paul means by faith more than 
 mere confidence in God. More than a clear conscience 
 that what we do will [)lease God. According to the N. 
 T. the spring of all I'ight action is faith. The sinner is 
 not in a right relation to God until he believes fully 
 according to the light given him Christian Ethics pre- 
 supposes a Christian man. Tlie primary duty therefore 
 is faith. 
 
 Virtue. — The idea of virtue contains two elements. 
 One is made prominent in the non-ethical idea, the other 
 in its philosophical idea. In the first, virtue is presented 
 as an activity or power, aosrvj — virtus, manliness, vigoi*, 
 power, energy. This continued to be their meaning 
 until philosophy applied them to moral acts. 
 
 In the other phase virtue is that state of inner excel- 
 lence wliich alone makes the former external excellence 
 [)Ossible. Man's competence to do the work of life con- 
 sists in a right inner condition. This issomething be- 
 longing to the dispositions. The harmony of the inner 
 nature with the right, the true and the good is first nec- 
 essary. Moral worthiness did not enter into the heathen 
 idea of virtue. 
 
 The O. T. furnislies no discussion of what this virtue 
 is, like philosopliy. Socrates found all good in knowl- 
 edge and evil in ignorance and error. Hence all wisdom 
 is virtue. 
 
 Plato makes virtue to be pleasure in the good, and 
 love to the good, because the good is the truly beautiful 
 and to be loved on that account. It showed itself in four 
 forms, wisdom, courage, temperance, justice. These are 
 the cardinal virtues. 
 
 Aristotle found good in the harmony and just propor- 
 tion of things, hence virtue is due regard to this har- 
 moii}'. More especially, virtue is the true mean between 
 
24 
 
 all extrcmo-^. It has emotional or intcilcetnal forms. 
 Z3110 (Stoic) foiiii.l virtue in liviii2j in conformity to 
 natnro. Ilippino^s will be the result. 
 
 Epicurus put happiness in the foreo^round. The keen- 
 est enjoyment of the present is virtue. Individual en- 
 joyment is the good aimed at and the highest good. To 
 the lower classes this would bi* something sensual, to the 
 wise mm, something retiued. The N. T. found these 
 ideas of virtue existino-. It does not enter u[:»on any 
 delinition or analysis of virtue. It tells wliat man is to 
 do and to be. Its main care is that man should adopt 
 and practice faith, liope and charity-. 
 
 The word anzT/j occurs five times in the N. T. Four 
 times translated virtue, Phil. 4: 9 ; 2 Peter 1: 3-5, used 
 twice in verse 5 ; 1 Peter 2 : 9, translated " praises." 
 
 Erymological idea is that which gives man his worth 
 or value. Moral e.KCollence is also expressed by "ny.a.toG'jvQ. 
 Eph. 5:9; 4:21; Lukel: 75; Rom. 6 : 13, rendered 
 "righteousness." 
 
 Also by b:fiiO(j'jYr} and dyndcoaWrj, 1 Thes. 3 : 13 ; 2 Cor. 
 7:1; R )m. 15 : 14; Eph. 5:9; vyai'^vji and yam (Tim arc 
 also used. While the IST. T. uses no one term but many 
 to express this idea of moral excellence, it is not to be 
 thought that it is vague in its idea of virtue. Call to 
 mind the exterior ideas of virtue and you tind both rec- 
 ognized in N. T. virtue. 
 Christian Virlne. 
 
 A. Christan virtue and virtues have and must have a 
 supernatural origin. 
 
 They are not found in man as he is. Ho has neither 
 the state nor the power of producing them. No new 
 faculties arc needed. The foundation is in his nature, 
 but since the fall man has failed to reach this virtue. 
 He lacks both the disposition and tlie power for the ex- 
 ercise of this virtue. There is no provision in nature to 
 regain this lost power 
 
 This is the teaching of the Bible, which addresses 
 man as he is in a fallen state. It declares that emanci- 
 pation and regeneration are both necessary, and cannot 
 be effected within the enslaved and vitiated nature. Con- 
 science supplies the motives but not the power. It 
 merely approves and disapproves. 
 
25' 
 
 B. While (yhrisrian virtue and virtues are super- 
 natural ill their orio^in, the N. T. represents tlieni as 
 natural to the new man. 
 
 They are not merely accredited to him hut are his, 
 iDelongino^ to his new nature. They distinguish him as 
 a new man. He is not a mere figure on which God dis- 
 plays the costunie and drapery oi" virtue. God works in 
 him, but he does his own will, impelled from within and 
 not merely from without. It is a moral disposition, 
 wrought hy the Spirit, more than mere natural endow- 
 ments, from which this virtue proceeds. 
 
 C. In answer to the question — what element in moral 
 condition or action makes or proves them right? the 
 N. T. answer is, conformity to the will of God. 
 
 The N". T. does not ask why this is right. The aim 
 of Scripture is to secure a practical religious life. It does 
 not enter into the metaphysical, philosophical or psycho- 
 logical questions in regard to these things. In the line 
 of religious revelation we can see why it is, God being 
 what he is deckired to be in the Bible, tliat conform- 
 ity to the will of God is the standard of moral action. 
 It is not the mere product of that will which is the 
 ground of right, but the intrinsic rightness thereof Two 
 practical reasons for this standard: 
 
 (a) To make right influential over man he needs to 
 have its attractions and constraints multiplied. 
 
 {b) If not only abstract but personal, if manifold and 
 not single, if concurrent and not sei,)arate, the power 
 drawing us to goodness is greatly increased. 
 
 If there were no taints of corruption wnthin us, the 
 mere abstract command would be sutiicient. 
 
 Our moral relations are personal, to God and not 
 merely to right and wrong. The right is intrinsically 
 right, conformitv to the will of God, and profitable; e. 
 g. thankfulness is right in itself when a favor is received, 
 and right according to the will of God in Christ Jesus. 
 (Eph. 5 : 20.) 
 
 (c) This mode of presenting virtue is a needed and 
 powerful corrective of man's ungodliness. 
 
 Man is naturally averse to the will of God and has a 
 tendency to resist it. This tendency needs to be power- 
 fully counteracted. 
 
'26 
 
 D. Christian virtue not being created by full develop- 
 ment, perfects itself in the advancing activities and 
 deeper experiences of tlie Christian life. The germs of 
 virtue only are planted by a supernatural power. Growth 
 in Christian virtue is secured by the use of what we 
 have, and by the help of God. Hence some writers 
 speak of a means ot virtue, i. e., those acts by which 
 virtue is guarded from hindrances, established against 
 them, and advanced in its inner growth. They do Hot 
 mean that virtue can be originated by these •' means." 
 
 Tliat which is sanctification in the theological phrase 
 is, in ethical phrase, the developing and perfecting of 
 Christian virtue. If it were developed and perfect at 
 tirst, there would be no need of sanctification. 
 
 N. T. expressions indicating this growth : 
 Gal. 5 : 25. Walk in the Spirit.^ 
 1 Cor, 1: 2. Called to be saints.- 
 
 Positive and negative expressions. 
 1 Peter 2 : 24. Being dead to sm should live unto right- 
 eousness. 
 Rom. 12:2. Not conformed but transformed. 
 Matt. 16 : 24. Deny thyself, take up cross. 
 Luke 14: 33. Forsake all, be my disciple. 
 Gal. 5 : 24. Crucifv the flesh. Col. 3 : 5. 
 Eph. 4 : 24. Put on the new man. Col. 3 ; 10. 
 Rom. 13 : 14. Put on the Lord Jesus Christ. 
 Eph. 4 : 13, 15. Growing up into a perfect man. 
 Col. 2:6, 7. Built up iir Christ. 
 
 1 Cor. 15 : 58. Abounding in the work of the Lord. 
 Col. 3 : 12 ; HeK 12 : 14 ; 1 Peter 1 : 13. 
 
 Agency. 
 1 Thes. 5 : 23. Sanctified by God. 
 1 Cor. 1 : 2. Sanctified in Christ Jesus. 
 
 1 Peter 1 : 2. Sanctified by the Spirit. 
 John 17: 17. Sanctified by Truth. 
 
 Results. 
 Rom. 6 : 22. Fruit unto holiness. 
 Rom. 6 : 19. Yield your members unto holiness. 
 Rom. 8:10. Life because of righteousness. 
 
 2 Cor. 4 : 16. Renewed day by day. 
 
 Palmer. "All divine training is fruitless unless I train 
 myself." In some Ethical treatises this is called "As- 
 cetics," in others " Discipline." 
 
27 
 
 E. When most effective as a power, and most per- 
 fected as a moral state, Christian virtue is not meritor- 
 ious in the Romish sense. Our work is so dependent 
 on God, that there is no ground for a demand of reward. 
 
 For Romish doctrine see 82nd Canon of 6th Session 
 Council of Trent. "Deserve eternal life, increase of 
 grace, &c." 
 
 Calvin, Institutes, chap. xv. Book iii; Turretin, topic 
 17, question 5. 
 
 South, Sermon 25th, lays down four conditions of 
 merit. 
 
 (1) That the action be not due. 
 
 (2) That that action may add something to the state 
 of him of whom it is to merit. 
 
 (3) That the action and reward be of equal value. 
 
 (4) That the action be done by the man's sole power, 
 without Ijelp of him of whom he is to merit. 
 
 In all these points Christian virtue can merit nothing. 
 
 F. Christian virtue where it exists cannot show itself 
 merely in general excellence, but must appear in the 
 form of specific virtues, and these when apparently 
 identical with certain natural virtues have a quality 
 which is peculiarly their own. 
 
 Christian life is always seen as concrete. Its objects 
 are definite, its conditions positive, so that the phenom- 
 ena must be specific. Individual acts must be seen to be 
 right. 
 
 Two infei'ences from individual right acts: 
 
 (1) With regard to the individual disposition from 
 which the act springs. 
 
 (2) With regard to the general state of the soul of 
 whicli this is one of the dispositions. 
 
 Christian virtue will then be seen and known mainl}- 
 in the Christian virtues. 
 
 Wo must avoid several errors : 
 
 (1) That of individualizing and isolating them too 
 much. 
 
 (2) That of seeking and finding them in outward 
 action rather than in the disposition. 
 
 (3) That of judging them by the test of civil law, or 
 public opinion. « 
 
 Remember, 
 
28 
 
 (a) That the virtues have a central principle whicli 
 gives them iinitj' and each has a strong afBnity for every 
 other. 
 
 (h) That they belong to the disposition more than 
 the visibly active life. 
 
 (c) That the test of all other dispositions must be 
 man's disposition toward God. 
 
 Plato's classification was accepted by the Christian 
 Fathers, and passed into many modern systems. He 
 makes the cardinal virtues wisdom, justice, fortitude, 
 temperance. We can't put wisdom in the first place 
 even if we mean by wisdom a moral excellence. 
 
 Ambrose and Augustine added faith, hope and char- 
 ity to Plato's four, making seven. Thus justice seemed 
 to be done to philosophy and Scripture, and the sacred 
 number seven had its signification. 
 
 Ambrose and Augustine put charity first instead of 
 wisdom, but the scheme is arbitrary and based on a 
 wrong principle. 
 
 Calvin based his analysis on Titus 2: 12. He makes 
 the virtues sobriety, justice, piety. 
 
 Sobriety regulating all belonging to self 
 
 Justice, all belonging to our fellow men. 
 
 Piety referring to God. 
 
 Schleiermacher's : wisdom, love, prudence, perse- 
 verance. 
 
 Wiittke'sissimple, logical and complete. Faithfulness, 
 justice, temperance and courage. 
 
 These he treats as phases of love, in different rela- 
 tions and toward difi^'erent objects. Their mutual af- 
 finity is strong. 
 
 Faithfidness. — Tzcarc:;, in a broad sense. It resembles 
 God's self-consistent and unvarying faithfulness to Him- 
 self. In man the love that God implants is true to self 
 Love true to self looking toward God, is faith in God ; 
 toward men it will show itself as self-consistent fidelitj'. 
 
 Perseverance, patience, earnestness, fixedness of char- 
 acter, sincerity, simplicity, and constancy are manifes- 
 tations of it. 
 
 Justice. In this scheme this is construed as a uniform 
 readiness to respect and concede the rights of each and 
 all with whom we have to do. Its counterpart in God is 
 rectitude. It reaches far beyond calculating equity.' 
 
29 
 
 Gratitude is justice toward God as bountiful and 
 gracious. To be ungrateful is to be unjust. Compas- 
 sion toward need}' men is another form of justice. It 
 would owe no man anything. This leaves no place for 
 works of supererogation, Rom. 13 : 7, 8. It is the golden 
 rule which is the Christian law of justice. 
 
 Tnnperance. — Is a due regulation of self andjuvblves 
 in its broadest sense a just reputation of self. Keeping 
 oneself within right moral bounds. Itincludes<Tw^,oo<TLiy/j 
 plus spjoars^a. acoip. well balanced, healthful mind; zyx. 
 keeping under control. In its fifst aspect temperance 
 will appear to be negative or prohibitory, restraining 
 and keeping back. But this restraint has a most positive 
 result. It forbids excess in order to secure the best use 
 of one's powers and energies. It regulates our feelings 
 and desires, moderating one's estimate of himself; hence 
 produces liumility, which is the regulation of our judg- 
 ment witli regard to ourselves. 
 
 Humility is preeminently a Chi'istiaii virtue. The 
 old tendency was to exaggerate one's own worth. Sin 
 in self and grace in God's dealing are factors which 
 ancient philoso[)hy never admitted. This temi)erance 
 will also show itself in self-renunciation and content- 
 ment. Pride, arrogan<.'e and undue self-assertion will 
 have no place. 
 
 Courage. — Not dvo/vsi'a, Greek bravery or courage, but 
 na^^rqaca^ contidence, boldness and hopefulness, which 
 impels to and sustains in the conflicts of the Christian 
 life. Boldness in anticipation of death and judgment. 
 Its basis can never be a consciousness of personal worth 
 or ability. Its basis is hope and faith in God, thus dif- 
 fering from all natural courage. Nothing in life or 
 death can daunt him wliose faith is staid in God, 
 
 These particular virtues are to be looked for as signs 
 of the general virtue. These are to be developed as 
 individual virtues, studied and nourished with proper 
 motives; yet Christian virtue has its unity and all go 
 hand in hand. We are to know the ground on which 
 each rests and to see that all are found in our character. 
 
 In Christian, Ethics Love is the central and radical 
 virtue as well as the central duty, not one among co-ordi- 
 nate virtues : so faith may be called the primary virtue 
 as it is the primary duty. 
 
30 
 
 G. What has Christian Ethics to say of the natural 
 virtues, such as parental and filial affection, generosit3^ 
 honesty, &c., found in unsurpassed excellence in some 
 who have never experienced the work of grace in the 
 heart ? 
 
 Christianity neither denies that they are virtues nor 
 thatlhey are natural, nor that they are largely in actual 
 existence among men, and in some degree and in some 
 form and measure all but universally present in human 
 life and character. To deny this would be to say that 
 all virtue is the fruit of regeneration. If either class are 
 natural it is those which have their root in man's con- 
 stitution and depend not on a second work, regeneration. 
 
 Chalmers: "God's word is not in conflict with the 
 consciousness of men. There are then natural virtues. 
 There is a social and a divine standard of morality." 
 (Institutes Am. Ed. Vol. 1, pp. 2 and 3.) 
 
 The precepts of the Old and New Testaments show 
 that natural virtues and dispositions are enjoined, as hav- 
 ing a basis in nature and not necessarilv in regeneration 
 Gen. 4 : 7, 2 : 7 ; Acts, 10 : 34 ; Rom. 2 : 14. '' 
 
 What has the Bible to say of the presence and worth 
 of these in unrenewed men ? Under what condition and 
 to what extent does the Bible deny to man the right to 
 congratulate himself on the possession and manifestation 
 of these virtues, and to content himself therewith apart 
 from regeneration. 
 
 2. Man's disposition is to regard only two parties as 
 concerned in the existence and manifestation of virtues, 
 viz. himself and his neighbor. The Bible recognizes 
 three parties. God isthe" third, 1 Cor. 10 : 31, Whether 
 therefore ye eat or drink, do all to the glory of God. 
 See also Col. 3: 22, 23; Eph. 6: 6. Titus 2:10, Ser- 
 vants, masters and God are concerned. 1 Tim. 5 : 8, If 
 any provide not for his own, &c., he is worse than an in- 
 fidel. Rom. 13 : 1-5 civic loyalty Eph. 6 : 1, the Obedi- 
 ence of children. Eph. 5 : 22, Obedience of wives. We 
 see that in all relations, God the third party is recognized. 
 In all or any of the natural virtues, even when justice 
 has been fully done so far as two of the parties are con- 
 cerned, it is not perfect unless it has taken account of 
 the third, i. e, God. 
 
31 
 
 1 Cor. 18: 3, charity without godliness is not recog- 
 nized. Phil. 4:8, Sincerity as a mere impulse is not 
 enough. 
 
 3. We may get the N. T.'s estimate of the natural 
 virtues by examining the epithets and phrases by which it 
 describes character and indicates the ground of its judg- 
 ment. 
 
 One group of these so often found in the N. T, is: — ■ 
 aapxcxo;; il'O-^txoc; Tcvvjfmrcxoz. Sometimes all of these and 
 sometimes onlv two are brought into contrast. 1 Cor. 
 2 : 12. 3:4; Gal. 6:1; Rom. 7 : 14 ; Jas. 3 : 15 ; Jude 
 19. 
 
 The third, Tzvzuiwxr/.oz, is always and only approved — 
 the others always and only condemned. The first two 
 are substantially identical morally, though not psycho- 
 logically ; the ruling principle being within the man 
 and not from God, as in the third. These tertrisare used 
 differently in the N". T. Greek from their classic use. 
 Ascendancy and control does not belong to that part of 
 our nature, the aaog, even when pure. The {l^oy:rj has 
 still greater control but no absolute and supreme right 
 even in fallen man. The natural virtues spring from this 
 higher nature the ^<orq — but impulse, reason and con- 
 science are alike amenable to the law of God, andcannot 
 have commendation unless controlled by the Spirit of 
 God. 
 
 (a.) So far fortli as they spring from man's original, 
 unvitiated constitution they are appropriate virtues. 
 
 (b.) So far as they have respect to their proper objects, 
 they are right. 
 
 (c.) So far as the sanction of conscien'ce, as Gtxl's rep- 
 resentative is regarded, they are commended. 
 
 (d.) So far as they are rooted in and spring from a 
 right moral disposition, they are endorsed and com- 
 mended. But they are censured so far forth as cherished 
 i'nd manifested without regard to God. So far as man 
 relies on his own judgment and impulses. A life that 
 shall please God and satisfy us must proceed from a di- 
 vine principle. 
 
 The Supreme Good. — Does the N. T. modify our view of 
 the supreme good to be aimed at, anticipated and attained? 
 
32 
 
 To the Bralimins and Buddhists, it is the disappear- 
 ance of tlie individual beina; and absorption in the uni- 
 versal being. 
 
 To the ancient Greeks, the doctrines of God and fate so 
 baffled their aspirations and endeavors that the supreme 
 good was never known. They were subject to the impulses 
 and caprice of too many gods and they and their godsalike 
 were liable to be crossed in all their plans by unknown 
 decrees of fate. Socrates made wisdom the supreme good. 
 Plato, harmony, Aristotle, soundness and symmetry of 
 self in all its activities. Epicurus, happiness. The Stoics, 
 conformity to nature, including reason. Kant, the union 
 of happiness with virtue. Through this we get an idea 
 of God and immortality. 
 
 Schleiermacher, the complete mastery of nature or the 
 interpretation of nature by reason. Hegel's system in- 
 cludes no Ethics. Spinoza admits of no moral element 
 and hence precludes anything but physical Ethics. 
 
 The Christian view of the supreme good is best given 
 by Augustine and Aquinas. 
 
 Augustine— return to God and reunion with God by 
 likeness to himself 
 
 Thos. Aquinas — that absolutely perfect .life of the 
 rational creature found in fellowship with God. 
 
 Schmidl — moral principle introduced and made real 
 in the world of realities. Shaping of the world around 
 us in harmony with the divine will and divine law ; our 
 will acting in conformitj' with the divine will. This is 
 an improvement on Schleiermacher. 
 
 Wiittke, twofold definition. 
 
 Formal and 'material. 
 
 Formal, defining it by that in which it ap{)ears. 
 
 Material, by that of which it consists. 
 
 Formal def. — It is the highest perfection of his rational 
 personalit}', i. e. the perfect exhibition of his likeness to 
 God, or the complete agreement of the reality of the en- 
 tire human life with the will of God. 
 
 31a(erial def. — The actual fellowship of life with God 
 which secures the outward appearance. 
 
 Remarks. — (1.) This conception of the supreme good 
 commends itself by the intrinsic excellence of the end 
 proposed. Nothing higher can be conceived of than 
 likeness to God and fellowship with him. 
 
'33 
 
 (2.) The end thus proposed to ns, plainly is and has 
 been an end with God— ^viz., our fellowship of life \^'ith 
 himself That which we are to seek, he has been seek- 
 ins^. He sought it in creation, much more in regenera- 
 tion. 
 
 (3.) The supreme good thus conceived of combines 
 two things of great importance : 
 
 (a.) The highestincitemont to aspiration and endeavor 
 on our own part, witli (b) encouragement of help from 
 him upon whom our success depends. To have chosen 
 this is to have been prompted by God, because no man 
 of himself asi)ires to this. God will not disappoint his 
 own prompting. 
 
 (4.) This conception includes and provides for all sub- 
 oi'dinate forms of good. This is what none of the other 
 conceptions did. It is the only certain guarantee of 
 wisdom, for in union with God we find the highest wis- 
 dom. It insures constant liappiness of the highest type. 
 "Ye shall be as gods knowing good and evil" is oidy 
 realized thus. 
 
 (5.) This supreme good is not exhibited as something 
 to be desired and hoped for as the tlnal attainment of a 
 distant future but as something with which a right moral 
 life begins ; to possess it, makes duty and virtue possible. 
 2 Peter 1:4. " Partakers of the divine nature." 
 
 The Motive Powder of Christianity. 
 
 We must now consider the working force of Chris- 
 tianity. What provision does it make for calling into 
 play man's moral power? Does Christianity hold be- 
 fore us anything better than the best philosophy? Does 
 it give promise and [irospect of attaining something more 
 thaji we could otherwise ? The motive power of Chris- 
 tianity is being more and more considered by the best 
 thinkers. Sec Blakie's "Four Phases of Morals ;" Prin- 
 cipal Sharp, " Studies on Poetry and Philosophy." He 
 says, what is the dynamic power in the moral life? 
 Calderwood's "Handbook of Moral Philosophy" ap- 
 proaches the same subject from the side of philosophy. 
 
 The practical problem is to restore the moral power 
 which we have lost. What motive power does Chris- 
 tianity supply which shall make duty, virtue and the 
 supreme good more than barren ideas? 
 
S4 
 
 A. The ambiguity of the word motive leads us to 
 indicate its sense as used by us. 
 
 (1) It belongs to every conception of moral action 
 and life that the moving power shall dwell and act with- 
 in man's own nature. 
 
 The term motive can be apidieri only in a secondary 
 sense to anything exterior to the man himself, e. g., gold. 
 
 Prof. Calderwood : " A motive is an internal force 
 which moves and excites the mind toward a single def- 
 inite action.'" 
 
 (2) In every intelligent agent the power thus moving 
 him consists of two elements : 
 
 («) The views which he takes, and, [b) The dispo- 
 sitions or the judgments and dispositions. Dispositions 
 include desires and affections. The dispositions are 
 non-rational, acting by impulse. The judgments are 
 rational, supplying both impulse and regulation. They 
 respect truth as truth, and recognize it in its relations to 
 us as a rule of life. These two motive powers may con- 
 cur or conflict. When they conflict, the control and 
 decision must belong to the higher and rational ele- 
 ment, the judgment. The dispositions cannot be trusted 
 to regulate themselves. 
 
 B. The motive power of Cliristianity must be sought 
 on the one hand in the convictions, beliefs and knowl- 
 edge which it gives to us to be motives, and which it 
 makes the rule of life: on the other hand, it will be 
 found partly in the dispositions which it develops to- 
 wards its centi-al objects, and through these toward all 
 other related objects. It cannot be found in either, ex- 
 clusive of the others. Neither can it be found in en- 
 lightenment only ; consequently those sj-stems which 
 work only through excited sensibilities are at fault. 
 
 C. The rational motives which are distinctive of 
 Christianitj', and which give it power and effectiveness, 
 are mainly those w.hich gather about its revelation of the 
 nature, character, relations and purposes of God, es- 
 peciall}' in Christ. 
 
 Our knowledge of secondary relations and duties 
 stand in the most vital connection to these tacts and 
 truths. This is the power to regulate us above all others. 
 Secondary duties are not disparaged when subordinated 
 to these higher duties. 
 
35 
 
 T>. The rational motive power by which Christianity 
 seeks to accomplish its results, is found in the view which 
 it_ojives, the belief which it creates, the knowledge wliich 
 it impai'ts, of the love of God. 
 
 This does not disparage the knowledge of his other 
 attributes. It does not draw us from aii}^ other duty, 
 nor is there less regulative than motive power in these 
 facts concerning the love of God. Nothing so secures 
 fidelit}-, vigilance, perseverance. Nothing so exalts virtue 
 as this love. 
 
 E. The motive object in which God's love is found 
 most fully embodied and expressed, is the person and 
 work of Jesus Christ. 
 
 A motive object is that toward wliich tlic mind is 
 called to act. Christianity presents this motive object in 
 tliree ways as ada[)ted to intluence us. 
 
 (1) As a new test to show us what we are ourselves — 
 sinners. 
 
 (2) As a new point of departure in our whole religious 
 and moral life. We see what we have not been, and 
 what we ought to be; and from the time we take Christ 
 we begin again, or if rejecting him go on to worse. 
 
 (3) As a new source and reservoir of motice power, ex- 
 citing our affections. 
 
 Illustrations. 
 
 (a) A man sees himself as never before when Christ 
 is fully before him. His power to love the truth, his 
 inclination and willingness to follow it are then tested. 
 
 (6) Christ becomes a point of departure, heavenward 
 or hellward, according as they receive or reject Him, 
 
 (c) There is no more vital, practical, winning trutli 
 than this. AH the rights and powers of God are brought 
 so near us, and to bear upon us in Christ. There can 
 be nothing more done to move us. 
 
 F. Christianity traces the new moral and religious 
 life to the work of the Holy Spirit, and offers this as a 
 motive power to all. 
 
 The Holy Spirit is really the motive power in Chris- 
 tianity, an almighty power not added, but entering into 
 all our work. Not that we live, but Christ by his Spirit 
 living ii> us. 
 
 When Christ has been received, neither the rational 
 or moral convictions alone actuate a man. (1 John 
 
36 
 
 2 : 20.) The dispositions are of divine origin ; no man 
 can call Jesus, Lord, brtt by the Holy Spirit. 
 Summary. 
 
 (1) The new and characteristic motive object that 
 Christianity brings and holds before the mind and heart, 
 is the most influential conceivable. 
 
 (2) Every other object with which the moral life is 
 concerned, has its import and power enhanced by the 
 relation into which it conies to God in Christ. 
 
 (o) In all who are brought rightly to apprehend and 
 respond to this revelation of God in- Christ, there is a 
 peculiar and powerful divine inworking, as well as co- 
 working of God in man. Faith overcomes the world. 
 
 Objections urged against the morality of Christianity : 
 
 1. The Ethical system of Christianity is not scientific, 
 nor presented in scientific form. 
 
 If this is anything more than a pedantic, frivolous 
 objection it rests on the misconception, that the Bible is 
 a scientific book. If it be scientific to take the only 
 complete view of man's condition and relations, then 
 Christian Ethics is scientific. 
 
 If scientific to locate and arrange and define duty as 
 never before, then the morality of Christianity is sci- 
 entific. 
 
 If it be scientific to perfect man's conception of vir- 
 tue, and to set before man the highest good any system 
 has yet presented ; if to show the possibility of reaching 
 this high excellence, and to supply the moral power nec- 
 essary, then Christian morality is scientific. 
 
 2. Another group of objections. 
 
 The requirements and standards of Christian morals 
 are too high for such a world as this. Too transcen- 
 dental, too easily exaggerated and distorted by us in our 
 apprehension of it. 
 
 (a) Standard too high. 
 
 What should the best system aim at ? AYould that 
 be a better system of morals which should aim at any- 
 thing less than likeness to God? Would it be an im- 
 provement to lower the standard, so that we might hope 
 to reach it ? 
 
 {h) Requirements visioywry and transcendental.. 
 
 E. g., " Whosoever shall smite thee on thy right 
 
37 
 
 cheek, turn to li'iin the other also." " Charity that 
 thinketh no evih" 
 
 But wo must take into cousideration the circum- 
 stances and the spirit in which ,it is uttered. The ob- 
 jection Hes often against the form of statement ; when 
 we study all togetlier the visionary and transcendental 
 disappear^. 
 
 {c) The system too delicate and liable to distortion. ■ 
 
 It presents its requirements so vividly that men run 
 into asceticism. Zeal in good works is apt to make no 
 account of knowledge, and to lose the proper balance 
 and proportion of true living. 
 
 True, it has sometimes led to [)erversion : develop- 
 ment has been unsymmetrical. True, men have been 
 called upon to extirpate what Christianity would regu- 
 late. We might say the fault is in human nature, but 
 this is not a sufficient answer, because the system is 
 given to us in our present condition. 
 
 It grows out of the very nature ot a moral sj'stem, 
 working by motives, that it does not effectually protect 
 itself against the infirmities of human nature. It is not 
 to be expected that it would constrain man always and 
 everywhere. The motives are set before us, and the 
 responsibility of seeing the truth, and doing tlie right, 
 is left to us. 
 
 Would the system be better if shorn of its power, 
 robbed of the vividness of its presentation, and less 
 urgent in its appeals? These become the occasions of 
 exaggeration and distortion ; shall we therefore take 
 them awaj- ? It is evident that this very character of the 
 Gospel is its power, and secures the measure of Chris- 
 tianity that exists. 
 
 Some make so much of truth as to become dogma- 
 tists ; some make so much of ceremony as to become 
 formalists. Tliese are exceptions. The misuse of a 
 principle does not do away with its right use. 
 
 3. Another group of objections charges the moral 
 system of Christianity with positive and serious incom- 
 pleteness. John Stuart Mill says, the O. T. must be 
 used to complete the morality of the N. T., and that of 
 the O, T. is bad enough. 
 
 He says it is a reaction against cei-tain things that are 
 
38 
 
 wrong. Its character 18 negative rather than positive. 
 It makes obedience the only valuable thing, and thus 
 takes away a man's dignity. 
 
 Answer: It is no dLsparagement that the Old and N. 
 T. morality must be taken together to complete a perfect 
 system. Both were instituted of God for difl'erent 
 times. 
 
 To the objection that Christian morality is passive 
 rather than active, innocence rather than nobleness, ab- 
 sence from evil rather than active power to good. Prin- 
 cipal Shairp answers, " this is ignorance or obstinacy, 
 not to be expected from Mill." The precepts and teach- 
 ings of the N. T. prove this objection totally unfounded. 
 
 Then as to the loss of self-respect, obedience to God 
 is Tiot humiliating or degrading. AVho has a greater 
 right to respect himself than the man who is a child of 
 God? 
 
 4. Christianity as an Ethical system, it is said, fails to 
 recognize adequately some of man's most important re- 
 lations, and is positively unfriendly to some of his high- 
 est interests. 
 
 Prof. Newman says, Christianity cramps human 
 freedom. It treats the instinct or love of knowledge 
 and b.eauty as illegitimate. In regard to family and pri- 
 vate rights decisions are given which are seeds of per- 
 nicious errors. It disparages or omits duties to the 
 state. It ignores the rights of Tiien and nations, though 
 it says much of the rights of kings and rulers. It sup- 
 ports lamentable superstitions, adverse to the progress 
 of civilization. 
 
 (a) Cramps freedom. Answer: Christianity guards 
 and guides, as well as maintains, Imman Ireedom. It 
 rebukes and restrains license; it holds man to his place 
 as a finite creature; does demand faith as the condition 
 of certain kinds of knowledge. But within proper 
 bounds Christianity protects man's freedom from his 
 own and other's abuse of it, prescribes laws for it, and 
 conditions of its working. It regulates the love and de- 
 sire for knowledge and beauty. 
 
 Christianit}^ is not to be held responsible for all the 
 narrowness and short-sightedness exhibited by its ex- 
 ponents. 
 
39 
 
 (h) Pernicious errors. E. g. Undue anthority given to 
 hnsbands, fathers and mothers at the expense of wives, 
 children and servants, disparaging more tiian half of the 
 human race, and robbing them of their freedom. True 
 Christianity does not sanction modern philosophies 
 \v'liich break down all distinctions. But it would not be 
 hard to show how Christianity has formed and protects 
 the Christian home. Because the precepts of IN. T. are 
 given to Christians, it is no reason why other men are 
 not to be bound by tliem also. All men ought to be 
 Christians. The historical eftect of Christianitj- does 
 not sustain these charges. 
 
 (c) Christianity represented as unfavorable to patri- 
 otic feeling and service to one's country. It either takes 
 no notice of or disparages our duty to tiie state. (Lecky, 
 Mill, Newman.) 
 
 True it does make less of the state than ancient phil- 
 osophies. It does not say that man is a political ani- 
 mal, but this is to its credit. True that early Christians 
 could not be faithful to the demands of the state, and at 
 the same time to Christ. 
 
 They could not take i:)art in idolatry and oaths con- 
 trary to Scripture. But where they were not called on 
 to sacrifice principle they were most faithful. The 
 charge now rests, chiefly upon there being little said in 
 the N. T. about our duty to the state. Moreover it is 
 said that obedience is exhorted to rulers rather than the 
 state. It. recognizes kings, however tyrannical, as or- 
 dained of God, but not nations or communities. 
 
 Lecky says, that patriotism as a duty has never found 
 a. place in Christian morals. He asserts, 
 
 (1) That strong religious feeling tends to divert the 
 mind from terrestrial things; (2) that an organized 
 church with a government of its own, an interest and a 
 policy, and a frontier intersecting national boundaries, is 
 unfavorable to national sentiment. Many denomina- 
 tions increases the difficulty. 
 
 (3) The saintly and heroic characters which represent 
 the ideals of Christianity are essentially different. Re- 
 ligion develops the saintly and undermines the heroic. 
 
 Answer : We may admit that small space is given to 
 this, and that Christianity does recognize two worlds. 
 
40 
 
 the spiritual and secnlar. Yet we repel the charge aiul 
 claim that no devotion to the state is so pure, no service 
 so great, as that of the Christian. 
 
 Luthardt says, the man who is true to all his obliga- 
 tions in the higher sphere, will be truest to all the ob- 
 ligations of the lower. Christianity exhibits a better 
 type of love than that of fellow country-men. All hu- 
 man affections are subordinated to love to Christ. 
 
 Francis AVilliarn Newton in his "Phases of Faith,"' 
 says, " the rights of those in authorit}- are preserved and 
 advanced by tlie morality of Christianity, at the expense 
 of the nation or the individual sul)jeet. Christianity is 
 always a main stay of tyranny and oppression." 
 
 Answer: Christianity does emphasize the sentiments 
 that are most likely to be deficient, guards the rights 
 most likely to be ignored. It aims to secure the sta- 
 bility of societ}'. This is not gained b^^ teaching men 
 to always and everywhere insist on their oicii rights. 
 Men m.ust learn to give up much for the good of others. 
 
 Christianit}' throws its influence on the side which 
 needs sup])orting. Yet it does not ignore the rights of 
 subjects. It impi esses rulers also, with a sense of fheir 
 duties. Being ordained of God only shows their re- 
 sponsibility to God. The remedy for contempt of au- 
 thority can come kindly, and efficiently, <inly from the 
 side of religion. 
 
 Christianity not being a political system does not go 
 into detail as to political duties. With its princi[)le of 
 love it inculcates also that of self-sacrifice, which sup- 
 plies the underground for freedom, courage, and faith- 
 fulness. 
 
 (d.) It is charged that Christianity supports super- 
 stitions. Belief in ghosts, witchcraft. 
 
 We are willing to accept the responsibility of pro- 
 moting belief in the existence of evil spirits, their mali- 
 cious activity and our exposure to them, and the use 
 of this belief to warn us. We don't deny the abuse of 
 this teaching. We simply say it is neither equitablenor 
 scientific in view of the great power of Christianity for 
 good to make these charges. It is not Christians who 
 abuse this belief. 
 
 (e.) Religious toleration, 
 
41 
 
 Wliat does Mr, Newman mean by toleration ? He 
 u'oiih] have rcliirious iiiditference. If he means that 
 Christianity would encoiira2:e forcible interference in 
 other men's beliefs, wo deny it. If, that we interest our- 
 selves in other's beliefs, in correcting the wronfi^, and 
 spreadini^ the truth, we admit it. He says, Christianity 
 is f^ivorable to i)itolerance because it teaches that God 
 will visit with fiery venjreance those wlio hold an errone- 
 ous creed, hence Cliristians will come to have the same 
 feeling toward those who do not so believe. 
 
 But that Christians liave any warrant for this or have 
 ever taken it. wc deny. 
 
 (/.) Christianity is said to be adverse to the progress 
 of civilization. 
 
 One form of this charge is from Matthew Arnold. 
 He speaks of Hebraisms and Hellenisms. Hebi-aism i. e. 
 Christianity, does less complete justice to man than Hel- 
 lenism, i. e. culture. 
 
 Religion exercises and developes certain elements of 
 man to the neglect of others. Hellenism is characterized 
 by spontaneit\' of action and breadth of culture. The 
 governing idea of culture is complete, symmetrical de- 
 velopment. He admits in developing a full manhood 
 that discipline should occupy the first place, wliich braces 
 the moral powers, and furnishes a solid basis of character. 
 The fault of religion is that it stops there. We want a 
 fuller and more harmonious development of our human- 
 ity. 
 
 Celsus charged Christians long before with being in- 
 different to wisdom. " With holding that the wisdom 
 that is in the world is an evil." 
 
 But Canon Farrar says Christianit}' made culture 
 possible and saved the intellect of the world from selfish- 
 ness, and an intoxicated form of pride, by putting it lower 
 than the affections. 
 
 Culture cannot be perfected until a higher end than 
 self is put before it. The N. T. insists that religion is to 
 preside over and encompass all culture. 
 
 How shall a man make the most of himself? What 
 shall he do with his culture, and why should he cultivate 
 himself at all ? Religion must answer these questions, 
 not culture. 
 
4-2 
 
 Some alleg^e that the influence of Christianity is ad- 
 verse to civilization. This is stronger than 'Arnold who 
 holds that Christianity needs to be supplemented. In 
 answer, we say, that no civilization has risen above 
 Christian civilization. 
 
 Frothinghani, and others, charge that Christianity 
 teaches men to undervalue riches, and the industries 
 which are the sources of civilization, and snaps the 
 springs of human enterprise. It teaches man to keep 
 the eye on the future lifo. Ans. If human industries are 
 so selfish as this theory maintains they need to be snap- 
 ped. Moreover we challenge them to prove that 
 enterprises are not developed when men are laboring 
 for Something beside self. If man is to rise to the high- 
 est manhood, we claim he must live for God and a higher 
 life. 
 
 5th. It is said that many of the assumptions, argu- 
 ments and appeals of Christianity do not address them- 
 selves to man as man, but are only of force on the con- 
 dition that Christianity is true. 
 
 If it contained fewer questioned truths and debated 
 propositions, it would be better fitted to move all men. 
 Many do not grant its postulates. It ought to take truths 
 universally conceded if it would influence men. E. g. 
 Christianity assumes that man is a fallen sinner. But 
 here is a man whodenys this, henceit is said Christianity 
 has no force for him, and therefore it is not calculated to 
 be the universal religion. 
 
 Ans. Are the communications of Christianity unnec- 
 essary or false? Is it to her discredit that she tells us 
 we did not know? Tells us things we resent? Would 
 its moral basis be improved, audits eflectiveness increas- 
 ed if all that men would willingly receive as true were 
 exscinded? Is it not to its credit that it reveals us to 
 ourselves even thougli the revelation is unwelcome ? 
 
 There is practical need of more knowledge ofour- 
 selv.'s, our wants and destiny. Here man is addressed 
 as man needing Christianity. And in that condition 
 which makes Christianity essential to him. We must 
 be told the truth, disagreeable as it may be. 
 
 6th. The great Chi'istian doctrine of Justification by 
 Faith leads men to neglect an active and resolute moral- 
 ity and even to tolerate immorality. 
 
43 
 
 Wo <jf course iulniit that tins doctrine lias been abused. 
 Chi'istiaiiit}' toadies that the best works are not done 
 for sake of beiiio^ justified b}- them' wholly or in part. 
 That is not the truest love which goes forth to show it- 
 self as love. That is not the most genuine gonerositj 
 which is always complimenting itself 
 
 Benevolence loses itself in its object. So of all <rood 
 r.ffections and good works. 
 
 Some like Gregg hold that a better morality is secured 
 when men arc taught that there is no forgiveness. That 
 sill has no punishment except iiatural consequences, yet 
 these are inevitable hence cannot be foi-givon. Teach 
 men this and they have some induceniont to guard against 
 sinning. Brahmanism also teaches this. 
 
 It is oiily from revelation that man knows of other 
 consequences of t-in than the natural, but those men do 
 not admit revelation. From the nature of things also, it 
 is onl)- from revelation that a liope of forgiveness is 
 raised. 
 
 It is hard to see how a better moi-ality would be se- 
 cured by telling men "tiiat there is no forgiveness. 
 
 That after the first sin there is nothing but despair. 
 
 When tiie scrijitures are so explicit in guarding this 
 doctrine of justification by faith from abuse and teacliing 
 pure holiness, we arQ authorized in denying that it is the 
 servant of sin. 
 
 7th. The Christian system influences men, too prom- 
 inently and exclusively by considerations drawn from a 
 future life; and so its powers are impaired over the 
 moralities of this life. Gregg urges in liis Creeds of 
 Christendom that a " morbid condition of the soul is 
 produced " and " insincere professions," aloss of eai-nest- 
 nessin taking liold of the evils around us. 
 
 {a.) Christianity teaches only this, that a just propor- 
 tion should be observed between things visible and in- 
 visible — things temporal and eternal. Keeping these in 
 tlioir [iroper ratio. It allows earthly things a place bui 
 demands that tliey be kept in their proper place. 
 
 Nature needs subduing only because, and in so far 
 as, man is disposed to disregard this proportion. 
 
 {/).) Christianity teaclies that when this just proportion 
 is observed, the near, the visible, the temporal, receive 
 
44 
 
 better care than wlien they are treated as man's chief 
 and only concern. 
 
 The motives by which his actions arc determined, and 
 the hiws by which they are regnUited and the results 
 achieved are better when this proportion is observed i 
 
 {c.) The fact that life is probationary, instead of low- 
 ering, exalts it. The fact that men deal here as stewards 
 and not owners makes their actions more responsible and 
 sacred, and brings to bear new motives. 
 
 (d.) Practically no men have discharged their tem- 
 poral and social duties with more c-owsistent and persistent 
 diligence and fidelity, than those moved by the power of 
 
 ARGUMENTS FOR THK DIVINITY OF CHRISTIANITY DRAWN 
 FROM ITS MORAL CHARACTER. 
 
 Usually placed among tlie internal evidences, but so 
 far arc objective — since they belong to external evidences. 
 
 All the proofs of Christianity are moi'al, not demon- 
 strative or intuitive. 
 
 Question. Does Christianity show in nioral substance 
 and structure such characteristics that we and our fellow 
 men must accept it as the true, the authoritative and 
 divinely sanctioned religion ? 
 
 I. I*^irst Argument. The superiority of Christianity as 
 a moral s\^stem appears in the precision and completeness 
 with which it exhibits the facts that concern man's moral 
 life. 
 
 The word superiority is used here in a very emphatic 
 sense. It indicates a divine not a human authorit3\ In 
 this higher sense we claim a superiority. It is exhibited 
 in three groups of facts. 
 
 (a.) Facts in reference to man's own nature, both in 
 its design and in its actual condition. 
 
 {b.) Facts with reference to the relation which man 
 sustains. Relations to all beings and things toward 
 which he can act morally. 
 
 (c.) Facts with reference to the end to be secured in 
 and by these relations, and by man's right moral action 
 in them. 
 
 II. The superiority of Christianity appears in the way 
 in which it awakens keeps, alive, and develops the sense 
 of duty in most perfect sj'rametry. Instruction and en- 
 
45 
 
 ligliteunient would avail little without the help of Chris- 
 tianity, arousing and purifying the moral impulses. 
 
 (a.) Man is continually confronted with the moral 
 rectitude of God. This is one of the ways in which duty 
 is ke[)t alive. 
 
 (b.) The reach of man's responsibility is disclosed in 
 Christianity as nowhere beside. 
 
 {n.) The sanctions and gracious provisions of Christi- 
 anity are designed, among other things, to discipline and 
 invigorate the moral sense. 
 
 in. Third argument formed by a combination of the 
 two former. The superiority is manifested, 
 
 [a.) In the duties emphasized. 
 
 {b.) The basis on which it puts them. 
 
 (e.) The order in which it presents and urges them. 
 
 [d.) The mode in which it presses them upon us, so 
 that by this very process which brings duty to view the 
 moral sensibilities are awakened, and invigorated to the 
 highest degree. 
 
 IV. In view of man's abnormal condition as a sinner, 
 the superiority of Christianity^ is apparent in its exhibi- 
 tion ot the conditions on which, and the means by which, 
 a man may attain the end of his existence as a moral 
 being. 
 
 The fact of man's ruin is presented most vividly, but 
 along with it Christianity shows what God has done to 
 lift him out of it, and hence man is not driven to despair, 
 but is shown that the iiighest attainment of morality is 
 the greatest and necessary proof of his grateiul love, and 
 the proper fruit of faith. 
 
 V. Superiority appears also in the motives which it 
 employs for the atUiinment of its ends. 
 
 (a.) In general, as virtue is exhibited as conformity to 
 the will of God, and supreme good, as consisting in fel- 
 lowsliip or life with God. To set up the will of God as 
 a standard secures immutability, elevation and consist- 
 ency in the standard. 
 
 {b.) It is more characteristic of the motive elements 
 and [)0wer of Christianity tiiat it reveals the gi'eat love 
 of God in Christ, so that whatever we do, we arc to do 
 it unto the Lord. 
 
 (c.) This superiorit}' appears in its eidiancing the 
 signiticance and importance of all duty done here, and 
 
46 
 
 all failure to do duty here, by connecting this life so 
 closely with the future life, so that whatever we do here 
 rightly has etei'ual recognition and reward and all fail- 
 ure and sin brings retribution and punishment, eternal. 
 
 VI. Another token of superiority may be found in 
 the fact that it insists so strenuousl}' on the inward rather 
 than the outward as essential in moralit}'. 
 
 Tlie disposition and intent. It demands the outward 
 as the complexion of the inward, it does not begin with 
 it. Incidentally this characteristic of Christianity secures 
 the culture of self-examination — humility and sincerity. 
 
 VII. Another peculiar feature of tlie superiority of 
 Christian Ethics is that tlie system makes chief use of 
 tlie facts of individual experience and of history rather 
 than of speculative and theoretical truths. 
 
 Prof. Blackiein his ^^ F(Air Phases of Morals'' com- 
 pares Socrates and Christ. The one a help and guide, 
 the other a foundation of faith and fountain of life. 
 
 Its general historical character antl specific liistorical 
 elements contribute much to the moral attiactivenessand 
 power of Christianity. 
 
 VIII. If we look distributively at the chief depart- 
 ments of practical and ajiplied morals, at wliat has been 
 called thcistic, social and individual Ethics, we find still 
 otlier proofs of the superioi'ity of the Christian system 
 and of its divine origin. 
 
 (a.) In regard to its exhibition of the duties which 
 man owes to God we notice : 
 
 (1.) Its fuller disclosure of vital facts conceriiing God. 
 PTis nature, relations and work with reference to us. 
 This gives a broader and more solid basis to that class 
 of duties which are specitic^ally duties to God, as well as 
 a greater definiteness, vividness and f)ower to the duties 
 themselves. 
 
 (2.) There is no duty that has not a side turned God- 
 ward. 
 
 God is i-ecognizcd as having not only orig'nally 
 ordained, but as having a present concern in all man's 
 duties. 
 
 (6.) The duties man owes to his fellow-man are put 
 by Christianity distinctly on the basis of the universal 
 Fatherhood of God — the common Brotherhood of man 
 and the redeeming vvork of Christ. 
 
47 
 
 [1.) All the relations of man to man are essential and 
 permanent, are ordinances of God from the bepjinning; 
 and are continually recognized and regulated in Hisdeal- 
 ings with men in all the successive stages of revelation. 
 They arc frequently dealt with by direct precept. 
 
 » (2.) All the most transient relations of man to man, 
 80 far as legitimate, are brought under, and may be main- 
 tained under, the sanctions of His Word. A relation 
 which cannot so exist and accomplish its purpose is shown 
 to be wi'ong. 
 
 (3.) Christianity ahvays accomplishes its main work 
 in society through principles better than through pre- 
 cepts. 
 
 Every relation can be thus regulated by principles. 
 Those principles run through both dispensations, giving 
 flexibility to the system and showing it suited to every 
 age and human condition. 
 
 (4.) Christianity works for the regeneration of society, 
 through the regeneration of the individual. 
 
 (e.) Man's duties to himself are not left on any merely 
 selfish or utilitarian basis. The excellence of Christiani- 
 ty here appears. 
 
 (1.) In the dignity ascribed to man's origin. 
 
 (2. In its representation of the expenditure of divine 
 thought, love and sacrifice, of which it declares man the 
 object. 
 
 (3.) In that which Christianity proposes to make of 
 man. The future glory which awaits him. In one sense 
 we cannot think too higldy of ourselves. 
 
 IX. The weight of these moral arguments for the 
 Divinity of Christianity is cumulative. It is to be esti- 
 mated by the combined force of all. The combination 
 being multiplicative, the conclusiveness of these argu- 
 ments in such a combination, is more thnn their sum. 
 
 The moral results of Christianity as illustrations of 
 its nature and proof of its divinity: 
 
 Chas. C. Ilinnel : "It is not easy to say whether 
 Christianity has done more good or evil in the world." 
 He imputes to Christianity asceticism, and whatever 
 otlier evils have passed under its name. He attributes 
 to civilization much that we ascribe to Christianity. 
 Tliere is great difficulty in eliminating what is due to 
 
48 
 
 Christianity in tlio great forces which combine to pro- 
 duce results. The problem is a complex one. But the 
 unquestionable fruits of Christianity, leaving out the 
 doubtful, are enough to prove our point. 
 
 Prof. Lecky gives three criteria of judging of prog- 
 ress in the moral condition of a country. (1) Tiie 
 changes that have taken place in the moral standard. (2) 
 In the moral type. (8) The degree in which tlie ideal 
 of moralists has been realized among the people. By 
 moral standard, he means the degree in which in dif- 
 ferent ages, recognized virtues have been enjoined and 
 practiced. By moral type, the relative importance at- 
 tached to different virtues in different ages. The moral 
 results of Christianity are tested: 
 
 1. With reference to the changes wrought In- it in 
 the moral judgments that have prevailed among men. 
 
 2. With respect to the changes wrought in the vis- 
 ible life of the world. 
 
 MORAL JUDGMENTS. 
 
 General remarks: — 
 
 A. We arc prepared to expect that Christianity will 
 work changes in the moral judgments of men, from the 
 more intimate and indissoluble connection which it es- 
 tablishes between religion and morality. 
 
 Man's relation to God, in Homer and other classical 
 writers, is legal and temporal rather than moral. There 
 is no reference to the inmost spirit and dispositions. 
 Religious motives were supplied for civic virtues, not 
 for inward impurity. 
 
 Montesquieu : ''Paganism forbade only certain gross 
 crimes, restraining the hand but neglecting the heart." 
 
 B. There is not only a more intimate relation estab- 
 lished between religion and morality, but it is a religion 
 of mutual helpfulness. The more powerful influence 
 goes forth from religion. 
 
 Schmid traces the moral importance of Paganism : 
 
 (1) To the nature of Pol_ytheism, which detracts and 
 weakens both religion and morality'. 
 
 (2) To the low and corrupting representations which 
 crowded mythology, art and worship. 
 
49 
 
 Lecky : "Ancient Rome produced many heroes but 
 no saints." Such was the influence of pa^i^anism, wliilc 
 that of Christianity is directly and powerfully helpful to 
 morality, sensibilit}^ and Jiidi^mcnt, penetrating to the 
 moral essence of sin and lioliness; bringing new meaning 
 and power to the old terms evil, good, conscience, &c. 
 
 C Group 1st. Illustrations of the new moral judg- 
 ments developed by Christianity: 
 
 I. We notice the new estimate which Christianity 
 led each individual man to put on himself and others. 
 It is the claim of Christianity to liave created the idea of 
 humanity. It first declared what it was to be a man. 
 This new estimate led to greater self-respect, and also to 
 the renouncing of unholy conceit and pride, because we 
 constantly see how far short we fall of the standard. 
 This would and did prevent men from putting their 
 powei's to low uses, and from sinking into degrading as- 
 sociations : 
 
 a. Now viev.s are given to man of the sanctity of 
 liunum life. Suicide iiad been commended by ancient 
 religions, philosojdiies and examples. Bnt Christianity 
 pronounced it self-murder. Abortion and infanticide 
 
 •were very prevalent crimes, justified by legislators. 
 Lycurgns said that weaklings should be put out of the 
 waj'. Christianity stamps this as murder. Paganism 
 sanctioned gladiatorial combats, wiiich Christianity from 
 the iirst resisted and condemned. Leek}' regards the 
 abolition of this amusement as one of the most signal 
 triumphs of Christianity. 
 
 b. Clirist^ianity taught the world to attach a new 
 value to chasiiU/. The ancient religions had contributed 
 to the demoralization of society. The system of sla- 
 ver\' and other agencies led to every imaginable form 
 of pollution. Christianity came, demanding purity 
 everywhere; in the home and marriage relations ; be- 
 tween man and man. The human body was made more 
 sacred by the incarnation of Christ. Men and women 
 are exhorted to become fit temples for the Holy Ghost. 
 Purity was made essential to self-respect. 
 
 c. Christianity taught men to put a new value on 
 veracitij. The self-respect of the in^lividual man and the 
 interests of society were thus enhanced and guarded. 
 
50 
 
 Plato and the Stoics under certain conditions justified 
 lying. Leckj says, that the influence of Christianity is 
 not entirely favorahle to veracity. He makes three forms 
 "of veracity : 
 
 (1) Industrial, i. e., fidelity to engagements and state- 
 ments. It touches the practical industries of life. 
 
 (2) Political, which, in matters of controversy and 
 public interest, would have all opinions, arguments and 
 facts fairly stated. 
 
 (3) Philosophical, which pursues truth for its own 
 sake. It desires to estimate truth for just what it is. 
 It cultivates a judicial spirit in controversy. These forms 
 are emphasized in proportion to the growth of civiliza- 
 tion. 
 
 He represents rhe theological spirit as an adversary 
 to progress, in retarding the growth of the last two 
 forms. It prompts the repression of all opinions and 
 facts not in accord with common faith. " Indeed," he 
 says, " Christian veracity deserves to rank with Punic 
 foith." But the very reverse is true. Christianity has 
 exalted veracity to what it was not before. The Ro- 
 man satirists comment on this want of gc^od faith in 
 their time. Plinj^ says, the oath of the Christian was. 
 to avoid theft, adultery and falsehood. 
 
 {d) Christianity creates the new virtue of humiliti/. 
 Life acquires a new sacredness, so that man has reason 
 to think more of himself Christianity never sufl'ers 
 man to reproach himself, nor reproaches him with the 
 fact that he is a dependent creature. It does show him 
 to be a sinner, and charges him to humble himself on 
 that account; requiring him in this regard to consent to 
 the verdict of reason and conscience. Modest estimates 
 of self were seldom inculcated in heathen philosophy, 
 but even then, it was for natural and moral reasons. 
 Appollonius. 
 
 D. Group 2nd. Changes which Christianity pro- 
 duced in man's estimate of certain common and often 
 inevitable conditions of human life. 
 
 Labor was regarded as a hindrance to public life, de- 
 grading and impairing virtue. Plato, Aristotle, Socrates 
 and the historians all notice and comment on this. 
 They said that labor was remanded to a particular class; 
 
51 
 
 tliat it blunted virtue and intelligence, and must be 
 done by slaves. Christianity reinstates labor in the re- 
 spect of the world, and shows it worthy of men of all 
 ranks. No redistribution of property could have been 
 as valuable to the world as this exaltation of labor. This 
 view of it was commended by eminent Christian ex- 
 amples. Adam, unfallen, was put in the garden to care 
 for it. The Apostles inculcated the dutv and the iionor 
 of labor. It was bi'ought into close connection with 
 Christian charity and so ennobled. It is the Christian's 
 duty to labor that lie may have something to give. 
 
 Poverty. — A no less prominent and beneficent 
 change was wrought by Christianity in the idea of pov- 
 erty. Greece and Rome pronounced it dishonorable. 
 Juvenal's third satire expressed the common opinion of 
 his age. " The gods waste no thunderbolts on a poor 
 man." Plato taught that the children of poor men 
 were no better than bastards, and a poor man has no 
 right to increase his class. The poor, as i)oor, are not 
 entitled to relief, for to show kindness to a poor man 
 was only to prolong his misery. 
 
 Schmid says, that it was necessarj' to reinstate man- 
 hood and to rehabilitate labor; to teach the rich to re- 
 spect the poor, and the poor to respect himself, and to 
 be content with his lot. Christ ennobled poverty, for 
 he was poor. Christianity w'orks in two ways : first, 
 inwardly' in the hearts of the poor themselves; second, 
 outwardly in producing sympathy, respect and charity. 
 It removes the stigma from poverty. " To tlie poor the 
 Gospel is preached." 
 
 E. Group 3rd. New estimates put on man's relations 
 and duties to his fellow man. 
 
 Illustrations maybe taken from three departments: 
 
 a Christianity implied, demanded and promoted a 
 new value of family relations and duties, and of the 
 nature and work oi' home ; especially the place of the 
 wife and mother in the home. Not only among sav- 
 ages, but under Grecian and Roman culture, woman 
 was greatly disparaged' and despised. Her physical 
 feebleness and incapacity to serve the state, put her 
 down with the children, tiie slaves and the poor. She 
 was endured because of her sex and not for her hu- 
 
52 
 
 manity. In the family which existed for the perpetua- 
 tion of the state, she had no influence, or vahie, except 
 as a necessity for tliis end. 
 
 Some have attributed the ruin of ancient civilization 
 to the low estimate of won>an. It was on-^ of the chief 
 causes. Among the Hebrews she had a higher place. 
 
 Christianity gives her the respect due to her as made 
 in the image of God, redeemed by the blood of Christ 
 and made the temple of the Holy Ghost. In her human 
 relations, she is represented not as the burden, but as 
 the glory of man, sharing with him the honors and re- 
 sponsibilities of home. 
 
 Monogamy is insisted upon ; adultery and concu- 
 binage denounced. Gratitude had something to do 
 witli the welcome given to Cl)ristianity by woman. 
 
 (/>) Christianity developed new inter[»retations of jus- 
 dee and equity/, wjierever their principles found applica- 
 tion among men. Kot only in the familj', but every- 
 where, it gives new force to these ideas. 
 
 Justice and equity are not measured by the law or by 
 the standard of a community. Man is to live right- 
 eously as well as soberly and godly. There are three 
 elements of Christianity which contribute to this 
 change: 
 
 1. The new views which Christianity takes and de- 
 mands of the nature and intrinsic worth of the parties 
 in any transaction. 
 
 2. The new aspect g,iven to the fact that God has in- 
 stituted these relations, and has a purpose in them. 
 
 3. In the new spirit and principle implanted in man 
 to interpret his responsibilities. 
 
 Christianity disclosed, in a sense created, the very 
 idea of humanity, and all the relations of Christianity 
 were niade in relation to the good of humanity. Love 
 is made the impelling, regulating principle of life. Jus- 
 tice and equity are to be construed by love. Who is my 
 neighbor, if all are alike in creation, in redemption, in 
 dependence on grace? 
 
 Christianity regulates our use of our freedom, what 
 we may or may not do. The transient duties are dis- 
 tinguished from the permanent. We are to love our 
 neighbors as ourselves. The selfish idea of measurinor 
 
53 
 
 duty by mere justice is done away. It is not mere legal 
 indebtedness. Love is made the expounder of written 
 as well as unwritten obligation. 
 
 In the state, Christianity taught new lessons of what 
 rulers owe to subjects, and what subjects owe to rulers. 
 It does not presume to prescribe the form of govern- 
 ment; it strikes at selfishnes and caprice in the inter- 
 pretation of the rights of rulers, and at the lawlessness 
 and servility of subjects. The state is made a means, 
 not an end. Old systems made it the end to which even 
 the famih' was subordinate. As rulers, men exist for 
 God and the [teople, and not for self. 
 
 It is objected that between the consideration demand- 
 ed by Christianity for all meii as men, and the speciiic 
 and intense love demanded of Christians for Christian 
 brethren, the breath of life is crushed out of patriotism. 
 
 In tlio provision made for the mutual fidelity of 
 ruler and ruled, we have the best safeguard of patriot- 
 ism. In the famil3% Christianity defined more perfectly 
 and consecrated more fully all the existing relations, 
 and the mutual obligations of its members. (Troplong, 
 " Influence of Ciiristianit}' among tlie Romans.") 
 
 Christianity strikes with the same blow, adultery 
 which provokes divorce, and divorce which provokes 
 adultery, and puts the conjugal bond above the caprice 
 of man. 
 
 One of the sternest judgments wliich Paul passed on 
 the heathen world was that it is without natural affec- 
 tion ; and this is justified. Children were a species of 
 property. Troplong sa^'s, tlie relation of blood is dead 
 and passive. Vico says, that in order that parentage 
 may make itself hei'rd, it must put on the civil mask. 
 The mere relation of father is impoi-tant. 
 
 Schmid : " The children belonged to the father and 
 he was to consult only the public interest. He might 
 sell or capitally punish them. Christianity confers 
 rights on children, and duties on parents and i:icc cersa.'' 
 
 Troplong pictures the conflict between a lather on 
 the one liand, and children, wife and slaves on the otiier, 
 under the empire when the father had been stripped of 
 mucli of his authority. Hence Christianity was charged 
 witii teaching the insubordination of wife and children. 
 
54 
 
 eiibvertins: order, loosening the bonds between slave and 
 master, cliild and parent. This charge in the face of 
 the fact that love was already beginning, ap a new bond, 
 to exert its reforming influence in the family. 
 
 Into the niutual relation between masters and ser- 
 vants, new ideas are introduced. In the old Roman law 
 the most valuable pro[>erty was lands, slaves, and beasts 
 used in assisting men. 
 
 Cato : "Our slaves are our enemies." Nero, strange 
 to relate, is the first to i-ecognize rights of slaves; he 
 charged magistrates to receive complaints of slaves 
 against their masters. Seneca alone, in his day, vindi- 
 cated the humanity of slaves. Paul : (Col. 4 : 1) " Mas- 
 ters give unto your servants that which is just and 
 equal; knowing that ye also have a Master in heaven." 
 (Comp. Eph, vi, 9.) 
 
 It has been said tlmt the master needed Christianity 
 more than the slave. 
 
 Schmid : In a society in which all meti are equal and 
 actuated by love, free service will be one elfect, and slav- 
 ery an accident, which, under the principle at work, will 
 gradually be removed. 
 
 Lecky : Slavery was recoi!:nized, but Christianity in- 
 troduced three principles: the new order of relation be- 
 tween master and slave, the moral dignity which attaches 
 to the slave, and the moral impetus to enfranchisement 
 ot the slave. 
 
 Christianity so transformed and developed, that it 
 may almost be said to have created, charity. 
 
 In the least remarkable form it led men to relieve 
 the wants (^f the brethren. Even this was unknown be- 
 fore; for the conception of a moral obligation to relieve 
 those of the same faith was new to heathendom. But 
 charity reached far beyond the bounds of common faitli 
 and owned the bonds of a simple human brotherhood, 
 manifested in its strongest form in love to enemies. 
 
 Fruits of Christian principle appeared and those 
 watching testified to their wide-spread influence, so that 
 heathen observers wondered. During tlie persecution 
 in Carthage, Christians relieved those dying of the plague, 
 imperiling their own lives. 
 
 Julian said : These godless Galileans nourish not only 
 
65 
 
 tlieir own poor, but also ours, inviting them to their love 
 feasts and nttractino them as cliilflren with cakes. 
 
 Tertullian : To love friends is common to all ; to love 
 enemies peculiar to Christians alone. 
 
 This teaching of Christianity grew out of the new 
 views which Christianity exemplified and inculcated with 
 regard to the very nature of chai'ity. 
 
 Heathenism did lu^t cherish charity even in the fam- 
 ily. Christianity wonderfully refined the sensibilities, 
 and purified the emotional nature. Charity was built 
 on the deeper foundation of principle, love to God 
 being the general motive, lf)ve to Christ the more 
 specific. 
 
 Aristotle, in his Ethics, says, that friendship cannot 
 exist without mutual love, which cannot be conceived 
 of on the part of the Supreme Being. It would sound 
 strangely for one to say he loved Zeus. 
 
 Christ's identification of himself with the poor and 
 the poor with himself, gave new meaning to charity. 
 Christianity, Lecky says, effected a complete reformation 
 by showing the identification of the poor with its 
 founder. 
 
 Unman brotherhood has been a dream of sc)me 
 heathen philosophers but never a reality ; we find feeble 
 indications of it in the classics. 
 
 Terence : " I am a man, and notliing that belongs to 
 man do I count foreign to myself." 
 
 " Christo in pauperibus,'' an old inscription testify- 
 ing to the union of the poor with Christ. 
 
 Christ had shown that the love of enemies was not 
 a mere negative thing, but a [)Ositive love. 
 
 The Indian books which are extolled by free relig- 
 ionists, are found on examination to be very defective, 
 and the virtues commended, they could not make vital. 
 
 On the other hand Christians began immediately to 
 practice, not merely to quote the teachings of Christ. 
 
 II. Is there anything to sliow that the ideal has been 
 realized ; that Christianity wrought actual changes in the 
 life of men? Was it true that men merely gained a 
 new conception of virtue, and not the power to prac- 
 tice it? 
 
56 
 
 What changes have been wrought in the visible life of the 
 world ? 
 
 What was an ideal oooi], has been made a real good. 
 The world is no more what it was before Christianity 
 came. It is not necessary to show eitlier that notliing 
 but Christianity was tending in the direction of this 
 improvement, or that the. designed result was at once or 
 is yet fully reached. 
 
 We need only show that Christianitj' has done some- 
 thing toward great changes, not attem[)ted before. It i^ 
 enougli if we cannot account for tliese beneficial rpsults 
 without Christianity, while on the other hand we can 
 account for the incompleteness of the results without 
 making Christianity responsible. 
 
 Some considerations. 
 
 a. The estimate put on man as man. 
 
 (1) Did Christianity practically, and not merely in 
 theory teach that life is sacred? Lecky (not over fond 
 of Christianity) pronounces it one of the most impor- 
 tant services of Christianity, that it definitely and dog- 
 matically asserted the sini'ulness of all desti'uction of 
 human life. (European Morals, vol. ii, p. 21.) 
 
 (2) As to chastity, the world is much purer than it 
 was without Christianity. Sanctity and purity are se- 
 cured to the marriage relation by Cliristianity. 
 
 (3) Veracity, fidelity. Illustrated by a single fact. 
 The European Constantine Chloras, fatlier of Constan- 
 tine the Great, surrounded .himself with Christians be- 
 cause of their fidelity. To test them, he one day gave 
 them the alternative of renouncing their faith, or 
 lusing their position. Most ke[)t their faith. These he 
 restored to their positions, while he dismissed the others, 
 saying, that those who would betray their God would 
 betray man. 
 
 (4) HamiUtg. — Christianity did not merely add hu- 
 mility to the catalogue of virtues, but gave it as an 
 actual power. 
 
 Lecky says, that humility is the crowning grace of 
 all the saintly type of graces. Though he thinks there 
 is another type of graces, a wholesome pride. There 
 was a danger of humility leading to servility. This is 
 questionable. James says, that God resisteth the proud. 
 
57 
 
 Philosophicjil pride is not the parent and o^uide of so 
 many virtues as Mr. Lecky claims. Man cannot wear 
 two faces, Finmble toward God and proud toward man. 
 
 Christianity had a double victory to ,<)jain, not merely 
 to conquer the defects and shams of society, bat cliieiiy 
 to gain a victory over every heart, to enable each man 
 to conquer himself. 
 
 b. The chaii<re Vv'rou-ght by Christianity in the world's 
 estimate of hibor and poverty. Consult Neander, 
 Church History, i, §3; also Memorials of Christian 
 Life; Merivale^s Conversion of the Roman Empire, also 
 Conversion of Northern Nations (Boyle Lectures) ; 
 Pressense's Martyrs and Apologists of Christianity. 
 
 c. To what extent Christianity wrought a change in 
 man's reh\tion to man. (See Pliny's Letter to Trajan.) 
 
 Free religionists call attention to the tenderness of 
 Hindooism toward animals, and some German replies 
 that it builds hospitals for sick cows, but burns widows 
 and throws children into the Ganges. 
 
 Bearing of Christian missions on the evidence that Chris- 
 tiamty is from God. 
 
 There are two questions. 
 
 (1) Are Christian missions a normal characteristic, 
 and necessar}' outgrowth of Christianit}' ? 
 
 If 80 (2) what do missions prove as to Christianity ? 
 
 1. The work undertaken and prosecuted in the pre- 
 cise line of the parting commission of Christ to his 
 church, as well as in the line of other teachings of His. 
 (Matt. 28: 19, 20.) 
 
 One essential feature is the acknowledgment of 
 Christ's supremacy and what he says is to be done, for 
 he is not only Redeemer but Lord. The church is not 
 to be merely a preaching and teaching church, but a 
 going church. 
 
 Not merely to teach, and preach to those lying 
 hardening in sin, about our doors or within a Sabbath 
 Jay's journey, but to go into all the world. So far forth 
 as the church is doing this, she is doing what is an 
 essential part of Christianity, 
 
 Effectual doors are opened by Providence. The 
 church must be ready to enter in when the door is 
 opened, and not be taken by surprise. 
 
58 
 
 2. The work of missions is a fitting and necessary 
 manifestation of the spirit of Christ, as imparted to the 
 church and dwelling in it. 
 
 This spirit would prompt the churcli to mission work, 
 even without the commission ; if any man have not the 
 spirit of Christ he is none of His, so also of the church. 
 
 Where this spirit is the same motives and aims must 
 prevail as were in Christ. Not merely must I go, hut 
 may I go. 
 
 3. 'The work of Christian missions is a vvork of in- 
 telligent obedience to Christ and Christ-like love of 
 men, directed towards and adapted to advance the Chris- 
 tian dispensation. 
 
 The Christian dispensation is the manifestation of 
 the glory of God, of the glory of God's grace, of God's 
 grace in saving, grace in saving men, saving men 
 through Christ, through Christ to everlasting salvation. 
 
 4. Those who receive the Gospel hold it in part as 
 a trust for others. Paul was a debtor to the Jews and 
 Gentiles. So every disciple owes the Gospel to others. 
 Christian intelligence regards it as due to others. 
 
 5. Another proof is found in the tact that the early 
 church full of the Spirit of the Lord and fresh from the 
 teachings of Christ was pre-eminently a mission church. 
 So every church in proportion to its fullness of the spirit 
 of Christ. 
 
 The English church was charged by a Pope as not 
 being a true church because it was not a missionary 
 church. (This was some years ago.) 
 
 It ia not so much the presence of the mission spirit 
 and work that needs to be accounted for, as the absence 
 of it when wanting. 
 
 The church that is not going and preaching must tell 
 why. 
 
 Objections against this view of the vital and essential 
 union of missions with Christianity. 
 
 Objections from Catholicism (1) the Catholic church 
 asserts that the Protestant body not being the church of 
 Christ, has neither the right nor the divine call, so that 
 the work must be spurious. (2) It calls upon Protes- 
 tants to unity of faith before they go out to disturb 
 the nations with diverse beliefs. 
 
59 
 
 It is not necessary to answer the objection that such 
 work must be begun " from Jerusalem," since Christ 
 coinnuinded them " beginning; from Jerusalem." The 
 work at home must not be perfected before a foreign is be- 
 gun. Where should we be if the church had always 
 taken care only of the work at home. Il is farther objected^ 
 missions are an artificial graft on the original stock of 
 the Reformed Ciiurch, alien to its nature arising from 
 narrow views of man's condition without the gospel. 
 They are peculiar to one type of the Reformed faith — 
 the pietistic — originating with Wesley and Whitefield. 
 As to the age of missions they areas old as the apostles, 
 and as to their being alien to the spirit of the Reforma- 
 tion it only shows that the Reformation needed reforming, 
 if it were true, which it is not. Modern Protestant mis- 
 sions date from the Reformation. 
 
 When, if these views are antiquated, did i\\Qy become 
 so? They are the views of the Apostle Paul. In whose 
 judgment are these views of the appropriateness of the 
 gospel to all narrow views ? 
 
 As Catholicism denies the call of the church to mis- 
 sionary effort, rationalism denies its daUj. Rationalism 
 maintains that it is not the duty of Christians, that even 
 if it were, Christianity is not adapted to accomplish the 
 desired result. 
 
 //. What do missionary results as so far developed prove 
 in regard to Christianity ? 
 
 1. The gospel message can be carried to all nations. 
 The commission so tar as it concerns the delivery of the 
 message in the speech that men use, can be fulfilled. 
 
 Many languages have first been reduced to writing 
 in order to carry the gospel. 
 
 A Danish writer calls attention to the fact that but 60 
 years ago translations had been made only in the Semitic 
 languages, Greek, Latin, Lithuanian, Celtic &c., while 
 now in almost every language and dialect. T)r. Moftatt 
 found w(U'd3 among the lowest classes in South Africa 
 that had had a purer and better meaning. No language 
 of earth refuses to have the storj' of the cross told in it. 
 
 Philologists often have to come to the Christian mis- 
 sionary for information in their field and sometimes only 
 to turn around against the mission cause. 
 
60 
 
 The question liow shall I [)reach the gospel is rightly 
 answered only when localized and individualized. 
 
 If the gospel is in the heart a way will he found to 
 express it. You must first have tiie gospel in your own 
 heart, then find out where among the people the altar 
 " to the unknown god "is. 
 
 2. The gospel message can reach and move the hearts 
 of men all the world over. 
 
 This shows it is from God. Though not co-e.xtensive 
 with the earth it is hroad enough to allow the induction. 
 Renan scoffs at the idea of disturbing the South-Sea Is- 
 landers in their simplicity. A strange innocenoy ! 
 
 3. The gospel message when received can produce 
 ifs legitimate and appropriate fruit on ever}' soil under 
 heaven. The gospel is full of vital and regenerating 
 power, and missionaries are encouraged to send it further 
 on, beyond their own stations. Societies are formed 
 among converts. It must not be forgotten how long it 
 took Christianity to revolutionize the German and Celtic 
 nations. The work of purifying is slow of necessity. 
 The cause for amazement is not that it is so slow but so 
 rapid. 
 
 4. Secondary and secular results of the reception of 
 the gospel message are a booji whose equal cannot be 
 found in connection with any other agency. 
 
 Good that culture never could accomplish. Gospel 
 alone can be relied on to produce endurance and per- 
 sistent struo^gles against evil. (So Prof. Nitzch shows.) 
 See Dr. EHinwood's ^' Great Conquest." 
 
 Ohjcciioiis. 1. From scientific anthropology. The 
 whole theory and practice of foreign missions rests on 
 false views concerning the relations of human races. 
 
 Such persons hold to the inequality of the liuman 
 races, frank enough to renounce Christianity with mis- 
 sions. Since missions assume that God has made of one 
 blood all nations, and Christianity also rests on this, 
 then tlie overthrow of the one involves the other. 
 
 This objection, in an unscientific form, is as old as 
 Celsus; he asked, who can believe it possible that the 
 same religion is suited to Europe, Asia and Africa? 
 
 2. It is foolish to carry Christianity before civiliza- 
 tion. First civilize then carry the gospel. 
 
61 
 
 a. The word "civilize " Christ failed to intrudnce into 
 his great commission. 
 
 b. Experience proves tliat civilization is not neces- 
 sary. Among some savage nations the gospel has more 
 effect, so that thpse objectors turn around and say it is 
 suited onU' for savages. 
 
 c. Christianity is the only effectual civilizer. The 
 testimony of the report of the committee appointed by 
 the House of Commons, of learned Englishmen, wlio 
 searched history for many years and reported that there 
 never has been a satisfactory civilization apart from 
 Christianity. 
 
 3. Practically, Christianity has proved itself in con- 
 nection with mission work, to be ill adapted to heatlien 
 nations. Tliey put their heathen idols under tlie altar. 
 The restraints of Christianity is killing off the natives. 
 
 4. Practically Christianity has made but little impres- 
 sion on the stronger nations, viz: India and China. 
 
 Some time ago there was some truth in this, but noi 
 now. We should remember that in China we have but 
 one missionary to every one and a half million. 
 
 5. As con.ipared with some other religions, Christi- 
 anity has shown greatly inferior jtower for impressing 
 men, especially in Asia and Africa. True to some 
 extent — and tiiis is an argument in favor of Christi- 
 anity which does not pander to human depravity. 
 
 6. Economical — Christianity involves tremendous 
 expense. A person objected to the writer that it cost 
 $50,000 to convert one soul in India. It is not true, for 
 facts show that in proportioti to the outlay, foreign niis- 
 sions are more successful than the home work. But if 
 true, Christ set a higher value than that on a human soul. 
 
 Ffnis, 
 
ANALYSIS OF APOLOGETICS. 
 
 PROLEGOMENA. 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Prelitnivari) qites ikma . 
 
 1. Why do I believe I am a Christian ? 
 
 2. Why a Christian in belief? 
 
 Answer to 1 lies (a) in ps^st experience, (b) in present. Answer to 2. 
 from (a) early education, (b) enliglitened choice. 
 
 Reasons for Stadi/ of Apologetics. 
 
 (a) Self-respect. (b) Loyalty to fellow-men. (c) For our times 
 especially, it is the question of the day. (d) Personal composure and 
 contidence. 
 
 Practical Aims of Apologetics. 
 
 1. friistitication .'uid confession of our faith. 
 
 2. Better qualitication to commend. 
 
 3. Fuller confidence in defending^. 
 
 Definition of Apolof/etics. 
 
 (a) " That part of Theology which vindicates the right of Theology 
 in general, and of Christian Theology in particular, to exist as a science." 
 (Partial.) (b) " That which sets forth the historial credentials of Chris- 
 tianity." (c) Science which sets forth the principles according to which 
 Christianity is to be defended, (d) That branch ofTheol. Science jvhich 
 sets forth the jiroofs that the claims of Christianity as a religion are 
 justified. 'I'erm Apologetics ambiguous. 
 
 Relative Position of Apologetics. 
 
 Some : In Practical Theology. Others : before Systematic Theology. 
 
 £iiterature. 
 
 Specific Apologetics for each age. Scientific and Practical Apolo 
 getics. Fundamental Apologetics and Christian Apologetics proper. 
 
 Kind of Eindence. 
 
 Logical ; metaphysical ; historical. 
 
 THESIS : That Christianitg is the true dicinclg sanc- 
 tioned and author italic e religion for us, and for all men. 
 
II. 
 
 CHRISTIANITY AS A RELIGION. 
 
 Christianity not the only relis^ion. What is a relig- 
 ion ? Definition reached. 
 
 (1) Etymologically — religio — from religere, to reconsider, rather 
 than from religare, to refind. @pri<TK€ia from either (a)flp"S, (b) Tpcu, (c) 
 Opdio. O. T. gives no specific term. 
 
 (2.) Hisloricaliy. Examine religions. 
 
 (3.) Philosophically — by induction of facts- 
 
 Definitions of Religion. 
 
 1. PniLOSOPHlCAL. 
 
 'Observance of moral law as Divine ordinance.'— (Kant. ) "'Faith 
 in moral order of universe." — (Fichte.) "A priori theory of universe." 
 — (H. Spencer.) 
 
 2. Theological. 
 
 " A mode of knowing and worshipping God. Relation of Revelation 
 to man, and of man to it. Relation of man to superhuman powers in 
 which he believes." 
 
 '• Man's life in personal communion with God." 
 
 " A mode of knowledge, thought, feeling, action, which has the 
 divine for object, ground and aim." (Proper and complete). 
 
 Advantages of last defence (a) includes all particulars, (b) recognizes 
 divine as object, (c) general yet applicable to specific religions. 
 
 Divisions of Prolegomena. 
 
 I. Phenomenology of Religion. 
 
 II. Psychology. 
 
 III. Ditt'erent theories of origin. 
 
 IV. Criteria. 
 
 V. Relations to morality. 
 VI. Significance. 
 
 I. Phenomonology of Religion. 
 
 1. Subject of Religion. 
 
 A. Man — not other creatures. 
 
 B. All men — not some only. 
 
 C. Essential characteristics of man. 
 
 D. Belongs to conscious voluntary phases of human life. 
 
 E. Belongs to man as moral agent. 
 
 2. Object of Religion. 
 
 The Divine. God of the SS, not of Positivism. 
 
 3. Actual Manifestations of Religion. 
 
 A. Phenomena of public worship. 
 
 (1.) Places set apart to worship. 
 (2.) Observances of worship. 
 (3.) Priesthoods. 
 
III. 
 
 B. Phenomena in private life. Household gods — family worship. 
 
 C. Creeds : — Philosophical, doctrinal, mythological, without any 
 
 form. 
 
 D. The social element in Religion. The ivorld's religions. 
 
 4. Tiipcs of the, wortiCs ReUf/ions. 
 
 Principle of classification : conception of the divine as an object of 
 worship. 
 
 A. Religions ok Naturk. 
 (1.) Non-mythological. 
 (ai. Fetichism. 
 (l)}' Siiamanism. 
 (c). Element worship, 
 (dj. Power worship in nature, and ancestor worship. 
 
 (2). Mythological. 
 
 (a). Objects of worship: e.xternal nature personified and deified. 
 A — Old Indian rels. B. — Baal, A star te', Moloch-worship. C. — Egyptian 
 religion. 
 
 (b). Human ideas personified a-id deified. A. — Greek and Roman 
 religions. B. — Persian relig. C — Old German rel. D. — Buddhisam. 
 
 A. SrrEKXATURAL Religions. 
 ( 3 ). Super-mythological. 
 
 (a) Judaism. 
 
 (b| Christianity. 
 
 (c) Mohammedanism. 
 
 Differences between (a) and (b). (1). In fulness of divine mani- 
 festation. {'!). In degree of doctrinal developmant. (3). In measure 
 of realization of intended results. 
 
 Other classifications ; criteria ; Historical development, suitable- 
 ness, political influence, nature of worship. 
 
 II. Psychology of Religion. 
 
 Preliminary — (a), spiritual oneness of man. {b). Necessity of 
 generalizing to cover all religions. 
 
 1. How manjj and which faculties exercised. 
 
 (a). Intelligence: guard against ultra intellectualism, 
 
 [h). Emotion : but guard against ultra emotionalism. 
 
 (c). Will : yet will not the seat of religion. 
 
 id). Conscience : yet religion does not originate in conscience. 
 
 2. The order of Fs>jcholof/ical development. 
 
 Question between Intelligence and Emotion. True order : (a). 
 Discovery of relations between man and God. (b). Recognition of feel 
 ings corresponding to the relations. 
 
 Guard against : (a). Theories tending to Pantheism. 
 (6). Theories implying that feeling is cognitive 
 
 (c). 'i'lieories ignoring or subordinating either cognitions or senti- 
 ments in religion. 
 
 III. Theories of Origin of Rei,igion. 
 The Natural Development Theory. 
 
 i'2). Atlieism. (2). Fetichism. (3). Nature worship. (4). Sha- 
 manism. (5). Idolatry. (6). Principle worship. (7). Theism and 
 Pantheism. This unscientific as well as unscriptural. 
 
IV. 
 
 Herbert Spencer: (a). Man comes to dualism in nature. 
 
 (6). To idea of supernatural in ghosts. 
 
 (<?). To Ancestor worship. 
 
 (d). Idolatry and Fetichism. 
 
 (e). Animal and plant worship. 
 
 [f). Worship of Deities. 
 
 Specific Theories. 
 
 A. Political Theory. 
 
 R. Physictil Theory. 
 
 C. Selfish Theory. 
 
 1). 'I'heory of primitive supernatural revelation. 
 
 E. I'heory of Supplemental Revelation. 
 
 IV. Criteria of Rei.igioiV. 
 
 (1). The traditional or prescriptire right of any religion to 
 
 exist. 
 
 (2). Tndh to Reason. 
 
 [o). Is the system consistent in itself ? (&). Does it harmonize witli 
 the world's constitution ? (c). Does it meet the needs of man ? 
 
 (3). Truth to Moral Nature. 
 
 Additional modern tests. 
 (4). Practical Test. 
 
 {a). Effects on the intelligence, [b). On the emotional nature, (c). 
 On .^Csthetical nature, (d). Other practical effects. 
 
 (6). Special Dirine Attestations. 
 
 Objected that attestations are superfluous, impossible, improbable, 
 not sustained by evidence. 
 
 (a). Not superfluous: from history of world aud present condition. 
 
 [b). Not impossible : from Omnipotence of God. 
 
 (c). Not improbable : from Benevolence of God exhibited in pro- 
 visions in nature. 
 
 V. Relations op Religion and Morality. 
 
 1. Historical. 
 
 (a) That there are such relations, (b) What they are. (c) Their 
 measure and direction. 
 
 2. Theoretical. 
 
 Define Religion and Morality in their mutual relation, according to 
 Martensen. This varies and so we have Ptiilosophical t-thics; Theoretical 
 ethics; Christian ethics ; Social eth\cs ; Political eth\cs ; origin of ideas 
 (a), of duty, {b). of virtue, (c). of supreme and subordinate good. 
 
 What are the Relations of M. and R. ? 
 
 6 views. 
 
 A. one includes the other. 
 
 (1). Morality merged in religi'in. 
 (2). Religion merged in morality. 
 
 B. (3). Each held distinct and essential and independent of each 
 other. 
 
C. Both fundamental tvnd primary, yet one subordinate to the other. 
 (4). Religion fundamental, morality subordinate. 
 
 (5). Morality primary, religion secondary. 
 
 D. (6). Both as essential and necessary to each : therefore coordinate. 
 
 Points of Afireement and-Dircrf/enni'.. 
 
 Agueeme.vt. 
 
 (1). Both in having their ground in human constitution. 
 
 (2). Both refer to e.xternal objects with real, valid claims. 
 
 DlKFERKXCES. 
 
 (3). In respect of relative |)osition of fheir objects. 
 (4). In quality of their claitn. Will of a person in religion : Abstract 
 right in morality. 
 
 ••}. J^racticcd Relations. 
 
 Religion and morality to supplement aud support each other. 
 
 VI. TuE Significance of Remgion. 
 
 1 . Of whit crinseq'ienee is it that one slioidd be religious f 
 
 Completene»s of manhood demands it. 
 
 Causes of irreligion. 
 
 («). Brutalized life. [b). Indifference, (c). Vividness of pressure 
 of material and secular interests, (d). Positive disinclination to religious 
 life. (e). Reaction against prevalent abuses. (/). Legitimate logic of 
 false speculative reasoning. 
 
 2. Of n^hal consequence that one should be rightlij religious f 
 
 There is a right and wrong in everything else, much more so in re- 
 ligion ; natural religion points to right religion. 
 
 CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS. 
 
 Christianitg in Particular. 
 
 Christianity is the system announced, established, provided for in 
 Scriptures. — Characteristics. 
 
 1. Christianity is a revealed religion. 
 
 2. Christianity is a historical religion. 
 
 3. Christianity is a positive religion. 
 
 4. Christianity is a rational religion. 
 
 5. Christianity is an ethical religion. 
 
 6. Christianity is a world's religion. 
 
 7. Christianity distinctly adapted to special conditions. 
 
 8. Christianity claims a Personal Founder in a special sense. 
 
 9. Christianity combines lis doctrinal and vital elements. 
 
 10. Christianity is an exclusive religion. 
 
 11. Christianity is the final religion. 
 
 Objections. 
 
 (1). God has not e-xhausted his resources. (2). Disparaging to our- 
 selves. Ans. — (a) All rightful antecedents point to Christianity ; It and 
 no successor, [b] It reaches the utmost wants of men. (c) Brought 
 to the world by the Son of God. Who shall bring a better religion. 
 
YI. 
 
 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 
 General Considerations on Evidence. 
 
 1. Is the establislimont of the proof of Christianity within the reach 
 of evidence? No intrinsic difficulty in God's revealing or man's appre- 
 hending revelation. 
 
 2. What kind of evidence will establish it? There are tliree kinds: 
 (a) Intuitive ; (b) Demonstrative ; (c) Experiential, probable or moral 
 evidence. 
 
 Last differs from others (4 ). In depending on experience. (2) Ad- 
 mitting of degrees of conclusiveness, i-^). Involving balancing of con- 
 trary proofs. (4). Involving responsibility. 
 
 Christianity not to be known intiiitivelv as demonstrating tlierefore 
 established by experimental evidence. Sources of this : (a) Conscious- 
 ness, {b) 'i'he Senses. (c) Memory. id) Testimony. Chief source 
 of evidence for Christianity must be Testimony. Testimony is received 
 by a law of our nature not from experience. Criteria of a historical 
 assertion, (a) That it alone explains the report. (?>i That it is what 
 should be expected. Ic) To be tested by rules of conditional or contin- 
 gent influences. ( Heberweg). 
 
 Various hypotheses tenable to account for historical assertions, (a). 
 That the event did happen and was observed, ib). That the observation 
 influenced by false apprehension, (c). That report influenced by false 
 apprehension, id). Recollection untrue. {e). Imagination influenced 
 transmitors. (/). Recorded in spirit and for purpse of romance, {g). 
 Purpose to deceive. 
 
 Relalice value of kinds of tesiimonij. 
 
 (1). Eye witness tru.stworthy provided he has ia). competence, [b). 
 opportunity and (c). character. Many eye witnesses better than one when 
 ( 1). they are independent. (2). Not influenced by same deception. (3). 
 Not affected by same pi-ejudice. 
 
 (2). Secondary witnesses judged partly by same tests but chiefl}' by 
 their relations to original eye witnesses. 
 
 (3). Later witnesses untrustworthy when (o). there is a personal in- 
 terest, (6). a lack af competence, opportunity or character. 
 
 RAWLINSON'S CANONS. 
 
 I. Record by contemporary and credible witness is of highest histori- 
 cal credibility. 
 
 II. Record by one reasonably supposed to have obtained directly 
 from those who witnessed is of second degree of historical credibility. 
 
 III. Record by later writers source of information being chiefly 
 tradition if event is of nature of public transaction notorious and afifected 
 propriety of national life it is probably true at lea.%t in general outline. 
 
 IV. Tradition of one race corroborated by another especially di.stant 
 or hostile, constitutes third degree of credibility less than first class of evi- 
 dence and nearly equal to second. * 
 
 3. What degree of assurance can moral evidence give ? 
 
 a. Not philosophical certitude, b. But certitude in moral or popular 
 sense. 
 
 I^ote. Distinction between subjective and objective certitude and sub- 
 jective and objective evidence. 
 
 €■ Moral evidence only void, entailing moral responsibility. 
 
VII, 
 
 4. What mental conditions necessary to estimating moral 
 
 evidence ? 
 (a). Attention, (b). Effort to apprehend, (c). Vigilance, to guard 
 against perversion, [d). Equity. 
 
 5. What moral conditions essential to treatment of moral 
 
 evidence ? 
 
 (a) Apprehension of moral responsibility. (b) Humility, (c) 
 Prayerfiilness, even in the light of nature alone, (d) Willingness to 
 abide by result. 
 
 6. What kind of moral ecidence offered. i)> favor of Christi- 
 
 anitij ? 
 
 Old classification : [a) Internal. (6) External, (c) Collateral. 
 New classification : 
 
 A. Historical. 
 
 B. Philosophical. 
 
 HISTORICAL EVIDENCES. 
 
 1. Nature iiiid claim, of Christianity as a Historical Religion.^ 
 2 Reasons for first considering Historical Ecidence. 
 
 (1). The idea ftf Christianity came to the world historically. 
 (2). Many elements in idea are historical facts. 
 
 (8). Pliilosopiiical argument more earnestly conducted after the 
 establishment of historical truth. 
 
 (4) Christianity an actual reality ; historical fact to be explained. 
 (5.) Christianity suffers where historical claims are not urged. 
 
 3. Historical Christianity as a fact to he accounted for. 
 
 Christianity exists and has existed. Historical existence of Christi- 
 anity is not disputed. Paul's four epistles, (Rom., Gal., I and II Cor.) 
 admitted. Facts alluded to : How came these to be believed ? Five indis- 
 putable facts. 
 
 (a). That in 2-5 A. D., (Christian society had no existence. 
 
 (6). In 4t) A. D., it was in vigorous growth 
 
 (c). It was founded by Jesus Christ. 
 
 {d) Crucifi.xion by Roman governor caused a collapse in this society. 
 
 (e) An event taking place soon after imparted new life. 
 
 These facts were abundantly verifiable : Late sources of informa- 
 tion. (1). Recorded personal observation (2) oral tradition, (8) written 
 documents, (4) monumental institutions, observances and emblems, (5) 
 significant charges and omissions. 
 
 Hypotheses jyropounded to accoun,t for these facts. 
 
 A. That of their reality. 
 
 B. Other hypotheses, viz : 
 cent deception. 4. Willful decej 
 
 1. Legendary Hypothesis. 
 
 A. That of their reality. 
 
 B. Other hypotheses, viz : 1. Legendary. 2. Mythical. 3. Inno- 
 cent deception. 4. Willful deception, 
 
VIII. 
 
 Historical belief rests to great extent on vague, unverified body of 
 legends. Argument: Fact that there is in every people a body of oral 
 legends. Answer: Christianity not based on oral statements but written 
 documents. Paul, 10 years after death of Christ, could not have used 
 legends as he does facts of Christianity. 
 
 2. Mythical Hypothesis 
 
 Must (a) dispose of gospel narrative, (b) of gospel history in narra- 
 tive (c) of character of Christ. 
 
 In regard to (a) the theory is unsatisfactory. (1). Cannot account 
 for myths. 
 
 (a.) Assumption that historical movements excite myth-making 
 spirit. 
 
 (6) Christianity beginning where, when and as it did not call forth 
 myth-making. 
 
 (c) Apocryphal books do not show this tendency. 
 
 {d) Where did Christ's followers get such ideas as made the germ of 
 the alleged myths. 
 
 (e) After myths had been created, there would be a difficultly to im- 
 pose them. 
 
 (2). The myths cannot account for the facts. The change wrought 
 in ideas of Messiah. 
 
 3. Tlie hypotheses of deception. 
 
 (1). Unconscious deception. 
 
 (2). Wilful deception. 
 
 (a). So far as refers to Christ. Unconscious deception; reconciliation 
 to facts is impossible. Wilful decejition also. 
 
 (6). So far as it refers to Apostles in either case the conduct of the 
 men is to be accounted for ; the difficulties in their way ; the character, 
 circumstances, marvelous appearance of honesty. 
 
 Apply these hypotheses to tiie resurrection. The hypothesis of re- 
 ality accounts for: (1). The narrative. -(2). The character and con- 
 duct of first disciples. (3). The rise of Christianity. 
 
 (a). The theory of legend or myth cannot account for when, where 
 and how the narrative arose and how it supplanted the original and true 
 record without leaving traces of the struggle. 
 
 (6). The theories of deception, that of designed deception is too 
 violent and therefore universally abandoned ; that of unconscious decep- 
 tion assumes either, (1). that the disciples mistook somebody else for 
 Christ for a long time or (2). that they mistook the hallucination, of their 
 imaginations. This last is the favorite. Assumes a greater miracle than 
 that of the resurrection. 
 
 THE CHllISTIAN SCRIPTURES. 
 
 1. The SS. as a source of informatio7i concerning Christianity. 
 
 (1). They are not the only source of information. 
 
 (2). They are not merely a source of information. 
 
 (3). Christianity is closely iaentified with them. 
 
 (4). Decision in regard to them can't be a matter of indifference. 
 
 (•')). They have on legal principles a presumptive value. 
 
 2. Historical criticism in relation to the Christian SS. 
 
 Christian SS. invite criticism. Christians must ascertain relations of 
 material to authorship of SS. Four questions. 
 
IX. 
 
 A. Whether material is what it claims to be ; qveslion of avihnUinly. 
 
 B. Whether it is in nnrhiinjrcd form ; qvesfion of iiitfrjrily. 
 
 C. Whether wlien jiioducetl il did and can give what it claims to 
 establish ; question of correct mxft. 
 
 I). Whether it contains all the elements of" Knowledge ; qvealion of 
 compleieiieas. 
 
 Genuineness, authenticity, integrity, credibility are ambignons terms ; 
 use three, Authenticity, Integrity, Credibifity. 'J hey are interrelated and 
 mutually helpful. 
 
 I. THE N. T. CANON. 
 
 1. Drf. " Collection of books Avliicli constiliitcs oiiginal 
 
 written rule of Christiiui faith." (Westeott). 
 
 2. Authorship. 
 
 (1). By whom was this collection niade. (2). By whom invested 
 with its autjiority. 
 
 In answer to ( 1 ). 
 
 (a). 'I'he clnirch, no individual. 
 
 (b). The church as a whole. 
 
 (c). The church gradually. 
 
 (d). 'J'he church guided by instinct, not Holy Ghost. 
 
 In answer to (2). 
 
 Not the church, for it could not have created an authority over itself, 
 but intrinsic^lhe authority grows out of nature of book. 
 
 On >\hat principle citdit of (ai.onical iiulhiuily givmto these book, 
 we learn : 
 
 (1). From language used by early church in regard to books accepted. 
 
 (2). From language in regard to doubtful books. 
 
 (?>). The way in which complete canon was treated. Elements re- 
 cognized, (a), human; apostolic authorship. (!)). divine : inspiration of 
 Holy Ghost. 
 
 3. Relations of JY. T. to 0. T. canon. 
 
 [a). Attitude of early church towards O. T. determined by that of 
 Christ and apostles. 
 
 (/>). Why did church need other SS. 
 
 (1). O. T. predictions point to them : proof and full benefit must be 
 used for the church and world. 
 
 (2). Jesus Christ was the promised Messiah, therefore his s-ayings 
 acquired like authority as 0. T. 
 
 (3). Apostolic words were regarded as authorized by Christ. 
 
 (4). Practical necessities, (a). Habit of reading in public worship. 
 (6). Authoritative standard caused early writing down of the N. T. 
 
 4. The Composition of Canon. 
 
 A work of time necessarily. Testimony to it by apostolic fathers 
 120-190 Greek apologists. Early versions. Heretics. 
 
 5. Objections to the Composition of Canon. 
 
 The books were regarded as diflTering in ralue in early church during 
 8d and 4th centuries. Ans. (a). 'J'he methods of the early church not 
 those of critical schools. (6). The spirit of the early church diH'erent. 
 (c). The difference admits of ea.sy explanations. 
 
THE AUTHENTICITY OF N. T. SCRIPTURES. 
 
 1. At the end of 2d century there were in possession of early church 
 books, bearing names of our scriptures. 
 
 2. Identity determined by MSS. early MSS. and citations. 
 
 8. Inquiry: In what sense and with what reason church attributed 
 them to apostles. 
 
 Consideration!^ confirming Judgment of Church. 
 
 Out of 27 books 17 bear name of author, in substance of writing, 
 not merely title. 
 
 A. Not merely a literary satisfaction to church but a necessity to 
 have SS. ' ' 
 
 B. These documents transcribed and interchanged among churches 
 by apostolic authority. 
 
 C. DiflFerent sections of church asjree in result. 
 
 D. As a literary phenomenon f<jrgery is here unnatural. 
 
 E. Morally impr,)l)able that any could forge them. 
 
 F. Negative : Exposure would have been easy. 
 
 INTEGRITY OF THE CHRISTIAN SS. 
 
 1. External means of a.-<certainiiig Integrity. 
 
 (a, MSS. (6) VSS. (c) Citations. 
 
 2. Internal. 
 
 (I). Fitness of liocument to allegid source. (2). Harmony of sub- 
 ject, style to author. (3). Presence or absence of connecting links 
 between parts admitted to be authentic, and doubtful parts. 
 
 Credibu-ity of N T. SS. 
 Preliminary : 1. Lapse of time does not affect credibility. 2. Cred. 
 includes element of pei'sonal trust. Attesting and Presumptive credi- 
 bility. 
 
 1. Attesting Proofs. 
 
 (a). Many things assertel in N. T. are demonstrable by reason. 
 
 (6). By results which follow their reception. 
 
 (c). By external independent evidence. 
 
 {d). Most important attestation that the historical parts of N. T. at 
 least have lieeri received by larg.3 numbers of m3n who were satisfied of 
 their truth. 
 
 2. Presmnptlce Crcdibilitg. 
 
 A. Illustrated by considerations drawn from facts recorded. 
 (1). They were accessible to scrutiny. 
 
 (2). They were numerous. 
 
 (3). They were minutely described. 
 
 (4). Invited scrutiny by extraordinary nature. 
 
 B. Confirmed by considerations of circumstances and witnesses. 
 (1). VVitness numerous and diverse. 
 
 (2). Apparently far removed from deceit in spirit. 
 (3). No cause whatever why ihey should further such a cause bj 
 false means. 
 
 C. Utterly impossible that the central figure can be a fabrication. 
 
 D. Co-existence of harmony in representation, and clear signs of indi^ 
 vidnality in recorders. 
 
XI. 
 
 The O. T. Scriptuiies. 
 
 II). Chiistijiiiit.v luefls tlie 0. T. FS.. in oider lo understand its 
 antecedents. (2). The 0. T. Scripluies aie piejiiisitcry and provisional. 
 1 3). Christ and the Apostles command their use. 
 
 1. Canon (if 0. T. : C(ni}o.'-€d of ].aw, 6 books: Prophets and 
 Historical books written by propliets, 21 locks; Hagio^rapha. 13 books. 
 
 Two views held : (1). ].ooser Prot. vitw : (2). Ktman Catholic view. 
 Both opposed to evangelical view. 
 
 (1). Not all canonical books ofOT. are quoted or alluded to in N. T. 
 
 A. Argument for looser view. 
 
 Ans: (a). No occasion to quote all. d). Ai.scuoe of quotation 
 does not prove absence from canon. 
 
 (2). Express citations from other writings by .'•ame formulas. Ans : 
 Cannot be identified : probably ivlsiaiitial references to O. T 
 
 (3). References to Apocryphal book.? and influence of Apocrypha, on 
 N. "^J'. books. Ans : 'J'he first unsubstantiated ; the second admitted 
 proves nothinj;;. 
 
 B. Arguments for Catholic vidv. 
 
 (a). A tradition in the church traced to Apostle.'j. 
 [h]. Concur! ent belief of Greek and Patin churclies. 
 («). The authority of the Roman church. 
 
 Reasons for vn-appearavce of books iv caiiov. 
 
 (1). Some of them had not appeared at close of Jewish canon. 
 
 (2). Others had not come to knowledge of Jews after Babyi. cap- 
 tivity. 
 
 (3). Synagogue had noi et.ough information to decide. 
 
 C. Reasons for rejecting Jipocrgpha. 
 
 1. Confessed absence of Prophetic element. 
 
 2. Deterioration in poetic dignity and power. 
 
 3. In historical parts. 
 
 (a). Manifest presence of fiction. 
 (b). Assumption of false names to give weight. 
 (c). Incorporation of forged documents. 
 id). Gross historical inaccuracies. 
 
 4. In doctrine, snbservience to technical Judaism. 
 
 2. The Authenticity of 0. T. Canon. 
 
 (1). General internal evidences. 
 
 A. A marked congruity between authorship and subjects treated. 
 H. Characteristics of style in many instances. 
 
 C. The general spirit is authentic. 
 
 D. Parallel accounts within them. 
 (2). E.xteriial evidences. 
 
 A. Faith of Jews. 
 
 B. Alhisions by Christ and apostles. 
 
 3. The Credibility of 0. T. Scriptures. 
 
 (1). Historical facts of 0. T. are connected with divine comnmnica- 
 tions. 
 
 (2). Many signs of authenticity are signs of credibility. 
 
 (3). E.xternal corroborations. 
 
 (a). In Jewish observances. 
 
XII. 
 
 (b). The existence and some forms of Christianity. 
 
 (c). Foreign and secular sources of information. 
 
 (4). Inspiration. 
 
 Extent cf credibility : positions. 
 
 (a). Limited to matters of revelation. 
 
 (6). To greater historical statements CDnnected with raveliition. 
 
 (c). That it. covers the whole of these books. 
 
 4. nistoriccd Difficulties. 
 
 (1). Contains impossibilities : miracles. 
 
 (2). Contradictions. 
 
 (3). Faulty chronology. 
 
 (4). Exaggerations and extravagance. 
 
 Historical Evidences. 
 
 /. The S'vv'ptares (Jiemseli-es. 
 IT. Jesus Christ as delineated in the Scriptures. 
 
 III. The Miracles therein recorded. 
 
 IV. Prophecies loith declared or demonstrable fulfilment. 
 V. The Results of Christianiti/. 
 
 1. THE ARGUMENT FROM THE SS. 
 
 Partly negative, partly positive. 
 General characteristics. 
 
 A. The general theme and way in which it is presented show the SS. 
 to be of divine origin. 
 
 B. The aim and the way in which it is accomplished are proof of 
 divine origin. 
 
 C. Tiieir unity considered in connection with progressive develop- 
 ment and production. 
 
 D. Comprehensiveness in themes, and subordination of individual 
 themes to one subject. 
 
 E. Provisions made for promoting religious interest of every kind. 
 
 II. JESUS CHRIST DELINEATED IN THK N. T. 
 
 1. Look at the delineation : it is not human. 
 (a). The delineation must hav3 had a subject. 
 {b). Divine power seen in delineation of subject. 
 
 2. The person predicted as Christ proves the system divine. 
 
 (a). The correspondence between predicted and real Christ is one 
 element in this convincing evidence. 
 
 (6). The unique nature and character of Christ is nothing less than 
 divinely moulded and divinely evidential. 
 
 III. PROPHECY. 
 
 Prophecy classed as an external evidence of Christianity. Compare 
 e.xternal and internal evidence. 
 
 L The meaning of prophecy in ApologRtics. 
 
 2. The occurrence of predicted prophecy in 0. T. and N. T. fact 
 and its purpose. 
 
 3. The condition of validity: proof from alleged prophecy. 
 
XIII. 
 
 (a). The real futurity of event. 
 
 (6). Event beyond conjecture- 
 
 (c). Subsequent occurrence sis specificiilly foretold. 
 
 (d). Must not involve collusion between persons foretelling and those 
 accomplishing it. 
 
 (e). Obvious design necessary. 
 
 (f). Blending of vagueness with precision. 
 4. Other uses of predictive prophecy besides evidential, in regard to 
 CItristiauity specially. 
 
 (a). To give certain signs of Me.ssiah. 
 
 (6). To keep alive the belief in fulKlment. 
 
 (c)) To arouse a divine e.xpectalion. 
 
 5. To whom would predictive prophecy carry its evidential message. 
 Ans: To tiiose who knew fulfilment. 
 
 0. What truths involved and emphasized by each instance of autben- 
 icated prophecy ? 
 
 (a). God"s immutability, omniscience, power, &c. 
 
 (6). His general providential government of world. 
 
 (c. ) His specific providence. 
 
 (d). A specific design to accredited agent. 
 
 (ej. Things predicted usually have peculiar place in God's regard. 
 
 7. The special bearing of prophecy on Chiistianity. 
 
 IV. MIRACLES. 
 
 Three terms designate them in SS. 
 Design : To accredit those who wrought them. 
 
 Questions: 1. Are they possible V 2. Probable? 3. Credible? 4. 
 Is conclusion drawn from them warranted ? 
 
 1. Possibilitu of Miracles. 
 
 Def. Hodge's. How ascribe miracles to God ? 
 (1). By amount and quality of power displayed. 
 (2). By purpose or wisdom shown. 
 Are fliey possible ? 
 
 a. Wholly within reach of original omnipotence. 
 
 b. God did not limit his original omnijiotence. 
 
 c. God's immutability does not render impossible. 
 
 d. God's omniscience does not interfere. 
 
 e. Uniformity of nature not consistent. 
 
 f. Created things are not immutable. 
 
 2. ProbabUitij of Miracles. 
 
 Calculated to do good. Communications from God justify thera. 
 •3. Crc(libilU)/ of Miracles. 
 
 If not impossible or improbable they are credible. 
 
 Question: Are witnes.ses credible? Ans. In cases of Christian 
 miracles, hundreds of witnesses, could they have been deceived. 
 
 Objection. Testimony could not decide in such a case. Ans. More 
 improbable that testimony is false, than that the miracles occurred. 
 
 4. Evidential Bearing: Credit to messenger or dispensation to 
 which he belongs. Obj. 1. That phenom. can't prove spiritual truths. 
 Ans. Not claimed that something is made true but divine mission at- 
 tested. Obj. 2. Alleged miracles were not convincing to those who saw 
 thera. Ans. Moral evidence implies possibility of disbelieving 
 
XIV. 
 
 RESULTS OF CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 Earliest results proof of divine origin. Examine 1. Extent. 2. 
 Significance and 3. Utter disjiroportion of results to terrestrial agencies 
 employed in bringing them about. Each of these can be considered in 
 relation to. 
 
 1. Facts concerning propagation. 
 
 2. Intellectual influence of Christianity. 
 
 Z. Facts connected with moral and social influence of Christianity. 
 
XV. 
 
 ERRATA. 
 Apolugeties. 
 
 Page 37, line 32: For "desire" read "divine." 
 
 Page 8'J, line 26: For " disposed " read " indisposed.'' 
 
 Pao-e 48, line 1 : For " confines "' read " combines." 
 
 Page 49, line 27 : For '• E.xperimental,'" read " Experiential.'" 
 
 Page 81, line 2G, et seq: For "attested," read "attesting.'" 
 
 Page 95, line 6 : For " Josephus 2365,"' read " 22()5."_ 
 
 Page 108, line 40 : For " Presenfe," read " Pressense." 
 
 Page 109, line 39 : Read " Semen eat sanguis.'' 
 
 Page 101, line 13 : For colon after " validity,'" read " of." 
 
 Page 101, line 41 : For " proportional,"" read •' proportioned." 
 
 Ethics. 
 
 Page 4, line 25: For " wos," read " mos." 
 Page 18, line 1: For "same,"' read "some." 
 Page 31, line 22: For "fallen," read " unfallen.'" 
 Page 33, line 24 : For " Blakie," read " BUckie.'" 
 Page 33, line 36 : for " Sharp," read " Sliairp.'" 
 Page 40, line 9: For " Newton," read " Newman." 
 Page 44, line 12: Insert " Christianity '" at end of line. 
 Page 47. line 37 : For " Hinnal," read " Hennell." 
 Page 48, line 38 : For " importance," read " impotence." 
 Page 48, line 39 : For " detracts," read " distracts." 
 Page 50, line 2 : Read " Christianity is," at end of line. 
 Page 51, line 35 : For " work," read •• worth." 
 Page 54. line 28: Insert (c) for notation. 
 Pase 56, line 27 : For " Europeans," read " Emperor." 
 Page 57, line 28 : After " the work," insert " is.' ' 
 On Page 47, the sentence "The moral results.'" &c., should be ii 
 small cap. heading as on page 44.